Jump to content

User:Cypp0847/Draft/5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Historical revisionism in Hong Kong refers to allegations of Hong Kong Government or Chinese Government attempting to reinterpret or revise the history of Hong Kong. The move was criticised as resembling Ministry of Truth in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four and creating pseudohistory (偽歷史).[1][2]

The revisionism can be traced back to China, where propaganda and disinformation were said to be spreading through manipulated media to serve political end.[3] The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) also wield schoolbooks to write a new version of Chinese history better suited to the party's needs.[4] After the handover of Hong Kong which saw the city under the control of China, the accusations grew stronger as textbooks for students involving politics were heavily amended and edited. After the protest sparked in 2019, the authorities were accused of creating "an alternate history of events in which prodemocracy protesters are the villains, bringing suffering on everyone else".[5]

Change of official stance

[edit]

Tiananmen "massacre"

[edit]
Chinese tanks in Beijing, July 1989, after the crackdown on protests
See also: 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre

The Tiananmen protests and the subsequent crackdown in 1989 Beijing had been censored in China for years and remained a political taboo. In 2007, Ma Lik, a pro-Beijing lawmaker in Hong Kong, claimed there was no massacre in Tiananmen Square in 1989 and questioned the authenticity of "bodies minced under the tanks".[6] Ma further called on the Government to formulate an official stance on the matters to avoid "sending wrong messages" to the students. The democrats slammed Ma as trying to rewrite Chinese history.[7]

1967 riots descriptions

[edit]
Meeting of the Anti-British Struggle Committee during 1967 riots, with Mao's portrait at the centre
See also: 1967 Hong Kong riots

In September 2015, the Hong Kong Police Force was found to have updated the website over descriptions of 1967 Hong Kong riots by CCP-supported leftists. Wording such as "Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung", "Anti-British Struggle Committee", "terrorism" were deleted, with "communist militants" replaced by "mainland gunmen". Critics argued the update was depoliticization and an attempt to distort history by erasing the role of Beijing loyalist in the riot. Police said the update was not politically-motivated, while Federation of Trade Unions, the leading group in the riots, insisted the labeling of "riots" was wrong.[8] The original text was eventually restored.[9]

2019 protests

[edit]
Hong Kong protest on 15 September 2019 during confrontation between protestors and police
See also: 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests

In 2019 during the large-scale protests, Carrie Lam, Hong Kong's Chief Executive, spoke vaguely of "some unprecedented social disruptions" in statements, or slamming the protests were riots, but rarely mentioning her attempt to push through the bill which ignited the protest, while praising the police for bringing stability. The police and authorities also sent more than 100 letters to outlets to rebut articles, and grown the public-relations team, arriving at protests with own media to film incidents.[5]

Yuen Long attack

[edit]
Passengers on train were attacked in Yuen Long attack on 21 July 2019
See also: 2019 Yuen Long attack

On 21 July 2019, dozens in white shirt, allegedly pro-government and triad members, attacked commuters in Yuen Long indiscriminately.[10] A year after the attack, Lam Cheuk-ting, the pro-democracy MP who was injured at the scene, was arrested for rioting. Police further described the attack was a conflict between "two evenly matched rivals",[11] echoing similar allegations and claims by the authorities that the anti-government protestors ignited the attack.[12][13] Democrats blasted the police's statement as revising the history of the attack and trying to whitewash the attack by the triads.[14][15] Clifford Stott, formerly an advisor on the Independent Police Complaints Council, said the police are trying to write their own history that is in line with their ideological position in order to mask the role of the state and to legitimize reactionary forms of policing.[16] The Atlantic described the police's stance as "the most blatant and audacious attempt yet at sweeping historical revisionism of last year's protests".[5]

Claims by politicians

[edit]

Democratization in Hong Kong

[edit]
See also: Democratic development in Hong Kong

The Chinese Government had repeatedly stressed Britain did not democratize Hong Kong until 1980s. People's Daily, Chinese Communist Party (CCP)'s newspaper, claimed in 2014 that the British developed Hong Kong's democracy rapidly with an "ulterior" motive.[17] State Council published a white paper in 2021, after revamping the electoral system in Hong Kong, further argued the democracy only existed after handover and grew with CCP's support.[18] John Lee, then Hong Kong Chief Secretary, concurred the idea.[19]

Mark Aitchison Young, then Governor of Hong Kong, proposed democratization in 1940s

While the direct elections of Legislative Council were first introduced in 1991, confidential documents suggested the CCP blocked attempts by Britain to democratize the city. After the end of World War II, Mark Aitchison Young, Governor of Hong Kong, pushed for human rights and proposed constitutional reform known as the Young Plan to introduce representative democracy. However, Zhou Enlai, Premier of China, told Harold Macmillan, Prime Minister of United Kingdom through Kenneth Cantlie, a British colonel, in 1958 that he would not accept transforming Hong Kong into a dominion like Singapore. Two years later, a Chinese official of the overseas Chinese department threatened to "liberate" Hong Kong if a self-governing government is instituted. After considering the stability of Hong Kong of not to be attacked by China weights more than democratization, London Government decided to abandon the Young Plan.[20]

Governor David Trench intended to advocate democratization in the 1960s also, but gave up after pressure from CCP and the leftists amid 1967 riots.[20] In 1988 Hong Kong electoral reform, the Hong Kong Government concluded the public overwhelmingly disapproved direct election citing opinion poll, which differed significantly from the general opinion. Chris Patten, the last Governor, wrote in his memoir that the administration distorted the result as London and Beijing Governments had secretly agreed on including provisions of introducing direct elections into the Basic Law, provided that the consultation showed the public disagreed the reform.[21]

Chinese role in Asian financial crisis

[edit]
Donald Tsang, Financial Secretary during Asian financial crisis
See also: 1997 Asian financial crisis

The 1997 Asian financial crisis occurred shortly after the handover of Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Government, including Hong Kong Monetary Authority and Donald Tsang, the then Financial Secretary, successfully fended off the crisis after buying shares of companies with foreign reserves.[22][23]

Although Tsang and other officials said the whole operation was completely handled by the Hong Kong authorities,[24][25] rumours in China claimed the Chinese Government transferred lots of capital to Hong Kong in order to defeat Soros, and cited this as an example of China helping Hong Kong.[26] The spread of rumours had been slammed as rewriting history.[27] Some also noted the size of foreign reserves of China was similar to that of Hong Kong at the time.[28]

Hong Kong Chronicles

[edit]
Tung Chee-hwa, founder of think tank Our Hong Kong Foundation

Hong Kong Chronicles was first published in 2020 by "Hong Kong Chronicles Institute" under Our Hong Kong Foundation, a pro-Beijing think tank formed by ex-Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa. Editors of the chronicles wished to "describe but not debate" the history and information of Hong Kong, while supporters said the book filled the gaps of local history and appreciated its neutrality. However, scholars slammed the Chronicles as favouring the CCP for its "misleading" angles and length of description. Political commentators said the book averted mistakes by the CCP and gave no mention to the colonial government on the success of Hong Kong's economy, instead giving the credit to China. Historians said the Chronicles made more mention on CCP's East River Column than Hughesiliers, a group formed by multinational veterans, over World War II. The description on the assassination of Lam Bun, a radio commentator critical of the leftist, in the 1967 riots was also limited, while at the same time attempting to erase the role of the CCP in the riots. Activist Yu Jie said the publication of Hong Kong Chronicles was aiming to reinforce the national identity in Hong Kong.[29]

Textbook changes

[edit]

Textbooks used in Hong Kong were had to be reviewed by the authorities, which will provide "suggestions" for further amendments. Media discovered changes in various textbooks that could suggest a change in narrative to side with the officials.

For primary school textbooks, sentences of "Republic of China's regime relocated to Taiwan" were replaced by "Kuomintang relocated to Taiwan", as the Chinese officials denied the existence of Republic of China on Taiwan after 1949.[30][31] Taiwanese Government said the cover-up was a denial of fact.[32] Negative comments against the Qing dynasty were deleted, and shifted the focus to the actions by the foreign powers before and after the Opium War.[30]

The coursebooks for Liberal Studies were edited to remove sensitive wording like "separation of power", "localism", "civil disobedience", "pro-democracy", and controversies of the police, while shortening descriptions over Tiananmen protest. Images of Tank Man, 2014 protests, Causeway Bay Books and others were deleted.[33] The whole subject was replaced by the curriculum of Citizenship and Social Development in 2021.

Chinese History

[edit]

In the textbooks of Chinese History for secondary schools, major amendments such as Chinese's perspective in Hong Kong history with the education of Basic Law were included. The Chinese nation concept was emphasized, while the mentions for the fall of imperial dynasties were reduced.[34] Surveys in 2015 said nearly two-thirds of Chinese History teachers opposed the revision of curriculum to enhance the teaching of contemporary Chinese history.[35]

As early as in 2005, coursebooks of the Chinese History had already shortened the description of the Tiananmen massacre and toned down the protest as "political turmoil".[36] In 2022, the Chinese History textbooks were again rewritten, further compressing details of the Tiananmen Square crackdown and removed all mentions of the commemorative vigil in Hong Kong.[37]

Citizenship and Social Development

[edit]

In 2019, large scale protests broke out in Hong Kong demanding universal suffrage of the Chief Executive and Legislative Council elections. The anti-government movement, along with the pro-democracy dissidents, were cracked down in 2020 after the imposition of National Security Law. Since then, the authorities boosted the promotion of "patriotism" and Chinese national identity through various ways, including the new subject of Citizenship and Social Development (CSD), announced in 2021 which introduced elements on national security, patriotism, national development and lawfulness.[38]

"Terrorism" in protests

[edit]

In the textbooks of CSD, the protests were described as "involving illegal violent terrorism", "advocating secession and subversion", and "colliding with foreign forces", omitting mentions over peaceful protests and reasons behind while copy-and-pasting official statements.[39] All photos from the annual 1 July march had also disappeared. The labelling of terrorism was seen as an excuse to further crack down on opposition and consolidate control over the city,[40] while the United States rejected the collusion accusation as "disinformation".[41]

The textbook also claimed the enactment of National Security Law, which the word "national security" appeared 400 times in 121 pages,[42] as safeguarding human rights and Hong Kong's prosperity, without any controversy surrounding the law.[39]

"Colonial rule" not "colony"

[edit]

The common perception in Hong Kong regarding the British rule has been that Hong Kong was a "colony" of Britain until the handover in 1997, which some called the "transfer of sovereignty" (Chinese: 主權移交) from Britain to China or the reunification (Chinese: 回歸) with China. However, the new CSD textbook in 2022 vetted by the authorities stressed that Hong Kong was never a "colony" of the British,[43] as the Chinese government had never recognised the unequal treaties (Treaty of Nanking, Convention of Peking, etc.) or given up sovereignty over the city, and cited the United Nation's decision to remove Hong Kong from colonies list in 1972. The phrase of "British colony" have been gradually replace by that Britain exercised colonial rule over Hong Kong before 1997.[44] It was criticised as only adopting a Chinese perspective, and an attempt to revise the history.[45]

Similar situation had occurred once in 2018 already when "transfer of Hong Kong's sovereignty" and "China recovered Hong Kong" were rejected as offending term by education authorities, and insisted the British only "occupied" Hong Kong.[46] The democrats lambasted the vetting as "brainwashing".[47]

The official stance, although not a new position for China, was regarded as a further example of Beijing's determination to enforce its interpretation of history and events and inculcate patriotism as it tightens its grip over Hong Kong following massive protests demanding democracy in 2019.[48] Pro-Beijing lawmaker Priscilla Leung urged in 2022 to form a propaganda team to spread the message online that Hong Kong was never a colony.[49] Academic also said part of what constitutes Hongkongers' identity is the city's colonial history, and the curriculum is "to downplay any narrative that treats Hong Kong as having distinct historical legacies from China". By recognizing a single version of history and with the CCP monopolizing the history, academics said, concepts such as "one country, two systems" are subjected to the CCP's interpretation only, at the time when Hong Kong is being integrated into China more fully.[50]

By reviewing the past documents, officials in Hong Kong had in fact recognised the "colony" status of Hong Kong.[51] The Legislative Council, however, removed wording of "colony" from its official website after update, further instigating concerns of rewriting history.[52][53]

Separation of powers

[edit]
Main article: Separation of powers in Hong Kong

In British Hong Kong, the political system did not include a Western-style separation of powers, as the Governor appointed members to the Legislative Council, and tended to resemble an "executive-led system".[54] The Legislative Council was democratized in the 1990s, but was partially retraced by the Chinese Government. After the handover, the system was mostly kept, and the pro-democracy camp considered Hong Kong as having the executive, legislative and judicial powers separated in different institutions - a demonstration of separation of powers. The Government did not reject the description and the court supported the concept,[55] although both sometimes rather stressed the "checks and balances" between the powers and Hong Kong has a different style of separation of power than the West.[56]

On 31 August 2020, the Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung said Hong Kong had never implemented separation of power before and after handover.[57] The Chief Executive Carrie Lam and the Chinese representatives endorsed Yeung,[58] and said the three powers can co-ordinate with one another.[59] Authorities also pointed out that Hong Kong is in an "executive-led system". The Education Bureau justified the removal of a top judge's presentation that described the separation of powers as a feature of the city's rule of law from its website as part of an update.[60]

In 2021, Lam went further to suggest the Chief Executive is over the three powers. In fact, after all democrats in the parliament resigned in late 2020, the legislature had been in close co-operation with the executives in various issues.

Decolonization

[edit]
Old mailbox in Hong Kong painted in red

In 2015, Hong Kong Post Office decided to cover all British insignia on postboxes to "avoid confusion", which conservationists said was the attempt to airbrush history.[61] The redecoration on mailboxes was regarded as part of the effort to "decolonize" the city, urged by some Beijing supporters and Chinese officials, which includes pushing to rename British-styled places such as Victoria Park. Some also described the necessity of a "second handover", aiming to "correct" the "wrong" colonial values and to "reunify" the hearts of the Hongkongers with the Chinese, instead of the reunification of land only.[62]

Hours before the closure of Hong Kong Story on 18 October 2020, visitors chanted "Liberate" slogans before the photo which wrote "Hong Kong's tomorrow will be better"

In 2020, the Hong Kong Museum of History announced it would revamp the permanent exhibition "The Hong Kong Story". This raised concerns that the new version may be tainted by political propaganda and present a distorted account of history. The display was already said to be from the Chinese perspective instead of the Hong Kong's, mentioning little about the post-war period under the British rule.[63]

Inaccessible records

[edit]
HKChronicles was the first banned website
See also: Internet censorship in Hong Kong

After the imposition of the National Security Law, programmes of Radio Television Hong Kong, the public broadcaster, were vetted by the authorities starting from 2021,[64] while the old footages were removed from YouTube and other social media.[65] Apple Daily and Stand News, two pro-democracy media, were closed down after raids.[66] The websites and the reports were also removed and are only accessible through backups.[67][68] The archives of the historical record were said to be the preservation of the history.[69]

HKChronicles, a website created by an internet activist, was the first to be blocked by the Hong Kong Police citing the national security law.[70] Other websites faced ban also, including 8964museum.com that kept record on the Tiananmen crackdown,[71] and Hong Kong Watch, a human rights group based in Britain.[72]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "黨校老教授：偽歷史不應擴散到香港". Apple Daily. 2012-08-03. Archived from the original on 2021-03-22.
  2. ^ 麥凱茵 (2019-05-10). "【1984】拒學真理部銷毀歷史 前檔案處長：守着記憶大門". HK01 (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  3. ^ Lam, Willy (2005-08-11). "China's Own Historical Revisionism". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  4. ^ Fisher, Max (2022-01-05). "In a Race to Shape the Future, History Is Under New Pressure". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  5. ^ a b c McLaughlin, Timothy (2020-09-08). "How History Gets Rewritten". The Atlantic. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
  6. ^ "DAB chiefs have no more to say about Ma Lik tirade". South China Morning Post. 2007-05-23. Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  7. ^ "馬力冷血　否定六四坦克壓人變肉餅". Apple Daily. 2007-05-16. Archived from the original on 2019-01-26.
  8. ^ 張心怡 (1970-01-01). "警改六七描述 一哥：無政治目的 退休警員表不滿". 香港輕新聞 Lite News Hong Kong (in Chinese (Taiwan)). Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  9. ^ "Hong Kong, where history has become a battleground for Beijing". the Guardian. 2016-12-27. Retrieved 2022-07-18.
  10. ^ "【元朗7.21】白衣人無差別襲擊案首判決 7人罪成判3年半至7年 法官：絕不容許集體私刑". Radio Free Asia (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  11. ^ "【抗暴之戰】警交代大搜捕拘16人 林卓廷涉7.21暴動被捕 許智峯涉刑毁等三罪同被捕". Apple Daily. 2020-08-26. Archived from the original on 2020-08-25.
  12. ^ "江永祥：有人帶示威者入元朗　牽引 721 襲擊　否認最先到場軍裝警「逃走」". Stand News. 2019-12-30. Archived from the original on 2019-12-31.
  13. ^ "INCIDENT DAY – SUNDAY 21 JULY 2019 YUEN LONG" (PDF). A Thematic Study by the IPCC on the Public Order Events arising from the Fugitive Offenders Bill since June 2019 and the Police Actions in Response. Independent Police Complaints Council. Public perception had been misled [...], including the framing of the incidents inside Yuen Long Station as a one-sided indiscriminate terrorist attack when it had actually started off as a gang fight involving a sizeable number of participants from both sides.
  14. ^ "元朗民主派區議員：原告變被告　警扭曲事實、改寫劇本、漂白 721". Stand News. 2020-08-26. Archived from the original on 2020-09-01. Retrieved 2020-08-27.
  15. ^ "民主黨：警方顛倒是非、竄改歷史". Now News (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  16. ^ Hui, Mary (2020-08-27). "Hong Kong police are rewriting the history of an infamous thug attack on civilians". Quartz. Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  17. ^ Jacobs, Andrew (2014-10-27). "Hong Kong Democracy Standoff, Circa 1960". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  18. ^ "鄭若驊指《白皮書》表明英殖下無民主 回歸後中央支持發展民主". Headline Daily (in Chinese). Retrieved 2022-01-05.
  19. ^ "李家超:香港民主進程是回歸後才開始". Hong Kong Economic Journal. Retrieved 2022-05-16.
  20. ^ a b "港英時代爲何沒有民主". Upmedia. Retrieved 2021-12-28.
  21. ^ "民意彙集的政治：論兩次處理香港民意的缺失". HKUPOP. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
  22. ^ Chan, Norman (2019-09-11). "Asian Financial Crisis: The Battle to Defend Hong Kong's Financial Stability". Hong Kong Monetary Authority. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  23. ^ "陳德霖退休前最後回顧 「香港正處漩渦中心」". HKET. 2019-09-18. Archived from the original on 2021-06-29.
  24. ^ "憶入市打大鱷　曾蔭權稱不知董建華曾找錢其琛　自言事後才通知中共". Ming Pao. 2017-07-15. Archived from the original on 2019-12-02.
  25. ^ "陳景祥：香港98年獨力退大鱷". Ming Pao. 2016-01-25. Archived from the original on 2022-02-06.
  26. ^ "中國大陸誤傳中共98年救港股". Apple Daily. 2016-01-22. Archived from the original on 2021-06-21.
  27. ^ 李曉佳 (2019-08-29). "盲撐中共 也不容篡改打大鱷歷史". Ming Pao. Archived from the original on 2020-11-03.
  28. ^ "亚洲金融风暴重创香港 没有中共"支援" 香港能逃过一劫么？". Radio Free Asia. 2021-06-16. Archived from the original on 2021-06-27.
  29. ^ "《香港志》惹议 学者批歪曲历史". DW (in Chinese (China)). 2021-02-02. Retrieved 2022-07-18.
  30. ^ a b "香港小学教材删除"中华民国政府"". DW (in Chinese (China)). 2021-04-12. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
  31. ^ "香港新版小學課本刪「毒教材」 「中華民國遷台」改稱國民黨". Radio Free Asia (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2022-07-18.
  32. ^ "港教材刪「中華民國」 陸委會：此地無銀三百兩". CTS News (in Chinese (Taiwan)). 2021-04-13. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
  33. ^ "香港通識科課本大幅度修改涉政治取向內容引發爭議". BBC News (in Traditional Chinese). Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  34. ^ "「香港自秦朝以來是中國一部分」—— 香港歷史新課程，中史科變國教科？". The Initium. Retrieved 2022-08-08.
  35. ^ "Two-thirds of Hong Kong's Chinese history teachers opposed to curriculum revision". South China Morning Post. 2015-04-16. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  36. ^ "新編中史教科書 打造淡忘「六四」新一代". U-Beat Magazine. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
  37. ^ "New history textbooks for Hong Kong students 'compress events of 1989 crackdown'". South China Morning Post. 2022-06-03. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  38. ^ "Hong Kong's liberal studies to be renamed "citizenship and social development"". South China Morning Post. 2021-03-31. Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  39. ^ a b "公民科課本指「修例風波」涉暴力恐怖活動 一書稱「外部勢力變本加厲」 民主黨：無視事件深層原因". Ming Pao (in Traditional Chinese). 2022-06-13. Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  40. ^ "Hong Kong terror warnings criticised as excuse to intensify crackdown". Financial Times. 2021-07-28. Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  41. ^ "Hong Kong 25 Years After Handover". U.S. Consulate General Hong Kong & Macau. 2022-06-30. Retrieved 2022-07-04.
  42. ^ "In Hong Kong, authorities are anxious to re-educate the youth according to their own design". Le Monde.fr. 2022-06-24. Retrieved 2022-07-18.
  43. ^ "New Hong Kong school history textbooks say the city "never was a British colony"". Radio Free Asia. Retrieved 2022-07-18.
  44. ^ "Hong Kong was not British colony as China retained sovereignty: new textbooks". South China Morning Post. 2022-06-13. Retrieved 2022-07-06.
  45. ^ 陳, 艾伶 (2022-06-16). "中國企圖竄改歷史？！香港新版通識教科書稱：「這座城市從來不是英國殖民地」". Yahoo News (in Chinese (Taiwan)). Retrieved 2022-07-06.
  46. ^ "Pro-Democracy Party Slams Communist Party "Brainwashing" in Hong Kong Textbooks". Radio Free Asia. Retrieved 2022-07-18.
  47. ^ "Historical revisionism? Hong Kong education turns political battleground". ABS-CBN. AFP. 2018-06-08.
  48. ^ "EXPLAINER: Why is China denying Hong Kong was a UK colony?". AP NEWS. 2022-06-17. Retrieved 2022-07-06.
  49. ^ "梁美芬倡建網軍澄清「香港非殖民地」 教育局：我哋冇資源". Inmedia. 2022-07-06.
  50. ^ "Hong Kong Textbook Revision Seen as Chinese Political Move". VOA. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  51. ^ 倪文迪 (2022-06-24). "香港是否殖民地的重點不在字眼修改". HK01 (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2022-07-06.
  52. ^ "【Emily】立會網「港是殖民地」描述消失 秘書處：網站年初更新". Ming Pao (in Traditional Chinese). 2022-06-23. Retrieved 2022-07-06.
  53. ^ In an archived version of the website ("History of the Legislature". Legislative Council of Hong Kong. Archived from the original on 2019-11-04.), it mentioned –

    "From 26 January 1841 to 30 June 1997, Hong Kong was a British colony and its first constitution, in the form of Queen Victoria's Letters Patent entitled the Charter of the Colony of Hong Kong and proclaimed at the Government House on 26 June 1843, authorized the establishment of the Legislative Council and [...]".

    The version after update ("History, art and architecture". Legislative Council of Hong Kong.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)) removed all accounts of "colony", and said –

    "On 26 June 1843, Queen Victoria proclaimed the Letters Patent at the Government House, authorized the establishment of the Legislative Council and [...]"
  54. ^ Cheung, Gary (3 September 2020). "Why escalating row over whether Hong Kong has "separation of powers" in its political system is not just a fight over words". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 25 October 2020.
  55. ^ Zhu, Guobin; Kouroutakis, Antonios E. (2017). "The Hong Kong Subconstitutional Model of Separation of Powers: The Case of Weak Judicial Review". Hong Kong Law Journal. 47 (1): 221–241. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2967650. ISSN 1556-5068.
  56. ^ "CJ's speech at Ceremonial Opening of the Legal Year 2010 (with photos)". Hong Kong Government. 2010-01-11. Retrieved 2022-07-07.
  57. ^ "教育局局長會見傳媒答問內容". Hong Kong Government. 2020-08-31. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
  58. ^ Ng, Kang-chung (8 September 2020). "No "separation of powers" in Hong Kong, Beijing agencies say, adding Deng Xiaoping spelled out stance in 1987". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 25 October 2020.
  59. ^ "行政長官於行政會議前會見傳媒開場發言及答問內容（附圖／短片）". Hong Kong Government. 2020-09-01. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
  60. ^ Ho, Kelly (2020-09-02). "Hong Kong Education Bureau removes website slide on separation of powers as part of "update"". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 2022-07-12.
  61. ^ "Hong Kong to cover British insignia on postboxes to "avoid confusion"". the Guardian. 2015-10-07. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  62. ^ "香港親北京組織力推"去殖民化"倡"二次回歸" 學者：本末倒置". VOA. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  63. ^ "History museum's "Hong Kong Story" was far from perfect, but it now faces a gov't-sanctioned revamp". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. 2020-10-18. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  64. ^ Chau, Candice (2021-04-30). "Hong Kong broadcaster RTHK axes more content - documentary on newspapers CitizenNews and HKFP scrapped after month-long vetting". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  65. ^ Cheng, Selina (2021-05-03). "Hong Kong broadcaster RTHK deletes shows over a year old from internet as viewers scramble to save backups". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  66. ^ Ramzy, Austin; May, Tiffany (2021-06-24). "What Else Has Hong Kong Lost, Readers Ask as a Paper Is Forced to Shut". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  67. ^ "《果靈●聞庫》爭分奪秒Backup蘋果223萬篇文章 籲港人勿失根飄零 – 誌 HK FEATURE" (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  68. ^ "眾新聞 | 【告別蘋果後‧2】保留香港歷史 網民創資料庫備份昔日《蘋果》". 眾新聞 (in Chinese). Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  69. ^ "香港电台下架YouTube旧片 网友呼吁下载备份"保留历史"". DW (in Chinese). 2021-05-04. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  70. ^ "Hong Kong police use national security law to block protest-related website". South China Morning Post. 2021-01-09. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  71. ^ "Online Tiananmen museum is blocked in Hong Kong as Internet curbs widen". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
  72. ^ Grundy, Tom (2022-02-15). "Website of NGO Hong Kong Watch partially blocked amid rising fears of internet censorship". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 2022-08-19.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Cypp0847/Draft/5&oldid=1119263124"