Govt Revises Stance On Liaison Office And Article 22

The SAR government issued a revised statement on Saturday night, reversing an earlier position that appeared to be at odds with Beijing over whether Article 22 of the Basic Law applies to the liaison office in Hong Kong.

The original statement said Beijing's liaison office and its staff are required to abide by the laws of Hong Kong, as set out in Article 22.

But this comment came after the liaison office said on Friday that along with the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, it is not subject to the restrictions stated in Article 22 that bar central government departments from interfering in local affairs.

"“They [the two offices] are not what is referred to in Article 22 of the Basic Law, or what is commonly understood to be ‘departments under the Central People’s Government (CPG)',” the liaison office had said.

The SAR government's revised statement, which came a few hours after the original, still included a line saying the liaison office and its personnel must abide by Hong Kong law and the Basic Law, but gone was any mention of Article 22 specifically.

The first version had also said that the liaison office was "one of three organisations set up in the HKSAR by the central government in accordance with Article 22(2) of the Basic Law."

But again, the reference to Article 22 was dropped from the new version.

The SAR government said that the liaison office is authorised by Beijing to have a "special responsibility to handle issues relating to Hong Kong".

"It is entrusted with the authority and responsibility to represent the CPG to express views and exercise supervisory power on major issues such as those concerning the relationship between the CPG and the SAR, the accurate implementation of the Basic Law, the proper operation of the political system and the well-being of the community as a whole," the statement said.

Echoing Beijing's statement at this point, the government went on to say that it was therefore legitimate for the liaison office to express concern about the failure of Legco's House Committee to elect a chairman since last October, and expressing such concerns does not constitute "interference".

Pro-democracy legislators have accused Beijing of blatantly interfering in local affairs and damaging the "One Country, Two Systems" principle. The Hong Kong Bar Association has urged Beijing to "exercise restraint".

______________________________