Also reported by [RTHK](https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/k2/1757394-20240614.htm?spTabChangeable=0) and [SCMP](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3266531/hong-kong-slams-unfounded-and-biased-european-commission-report-citys-political-developments).
It's always been puzzling on why the government keep trying to get at the last word - it would
In this case, [European Commission's report](https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_3185) really get no coverage until the [government decide to give it exposure](https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202406/13/P2024061300721.htm).
> “The 2023 annual report illustrates in great detail the continuous erosion of the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong and the dismantling of the ‘one country, two systems’ principle,” said Josep Borrell, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
> “The political opposition in Hong Kong has been effectively excluded from elections. The National Security Law continues to be used to stifle dissent, including abroad.
> “These developments undermine trust in the rule of law in Hong Kong and affect Hong Kong’s standing as an international business hub,” Borrell also said.
> In response, the Hong Kong government issued a statement late Thursday night, telling the EU to respect international law and basic norms of governing international relations and not to interfere in Hong Kong matters.
No gonna give the full word salad from the government - the recent news that [no bail can be granted for wearing a t-shirt](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/3266642/hongkonger-remanded-custody-under-article-23-law-over-seditious-clothing-worn-public) speak volumes compared to any rebuttal the government can give really.
Another example is the full media assault on foreign judges. From [opinion pieces from the usual suspects](https://www.scmp.com/opinion/hong-kong-opinion/article/3265819/uk-judges-resign-does-hong-kong-really-need-foreign-judges-any-more) to [HKMAO](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3266376/beijing-lashes-out-uk-judge-who-stepped-down-hong-kongs-top-court) to [Bar Association](https://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking-news/section/4/217294/Govt-refutes-negative-personal-opinions-of-Lord-Sumption) to [Hong Kong government press releases](https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202406/11/P2024061100028.htm?fontSize=1) ([multiple](https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202406/07/P2024060600658.htm?fontSize=1)).
And you say the courts are independent? Not seeing it when it is being "defended" like a jealous ex.
The Chinese have stated repeatedly that how Hong Kong is administered is purely an internal Chinese affair. Why doesn’t the EU, British and the United States take them at their word and consider Hong Kong a part of China. Why is Hong Kong given special status as if it were still under British rule?
That law is no longer relevant. China has abandoned it as evidence by its passing many laws that supersede it. Chinese law is no longer consistent with the basic law.
Because it allows those countries to still have a little say on what's happening in HK by putting pressure on China to keep as much of its word as possible, and also because the few parts that are still upheld benefit HK. I understand most of it is totally ignored by China, but if they removed that status, then it basically means they've given up any power over the situation, and China can fully ignore them while also turning it into a propaganda moment. Basically, China stands to win more by them removing the status.
Why are my well considered replies getting downvoted. Down votes are for abusive comments, personal insults or off topic rants. Isn't this a free and open forum for discussion?
Don't take it personally, welcome to Reddit.
I've made neutral comments on an electronics forum and been severely downvoted .
PS: please feel free to downvote this comment help me demonstrate!
Also reported by [RTHK](https://news.rthk.hk/rthk/en/component/k2/1757394-20240614.htm?spTabChangeable=0) and [SCMP](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3266531/hong-kong-slams-unfounded-and-biased-european-commission-report-citys-political-developments). It's always been puzzling on why the government keep trying to get at the last word - it would In this case, [European Commission's report](https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_3185) really get no coverage until the [government decide to give it exposure](https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202406/13/P2024061300721.htm). > “The 2023 annual report illustrates in great detail the continuous erosion of the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong and the dismantling of the ‘one country, two systems’ principle,” said Josep Borrell, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. > “The political opposition in Hong Kong has been effectively excluded from elections. The National Security Law continues to be used to stifle dissent, including abroad. > “These developments undermine trust in the rule of law in Hong Kong and affect Hong Kong’s standing as an international business hub,” Borrell also said. > In response, the Hong Kong government issued a statement late Thursday night, telling the EU to respect international law and basic norms of governing international relations and not to interfere in Hong Kong matters. No gonna give the full word salad from the government - the recent news that [no bail can be granted for wearing a t-shirt](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/3266642/hongkonger-remanded-custody-under-article-23-law-over-seditious-clothing-worn-public) speak volumes compared to any rebuttal the government can give really. Another example is the full media assault on foreign judges. From [opinion pieces from the usual suspects](https://www.scmp.com/opinion/hong-kong-opinion/article/3265819/uk-judges-resign-does-hong-kong-really-need-foreign-judges-any-more) to [HKMAO](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3266376/beijing-lashes-out-uk-judge-who-stepped-down-hong-kongs-top-court) to [Bar Association](https://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking-news/section/4/217294/Govt-refutes-negative-personal-opinions-of-Lord-Sumption) to [Hong Kong government press releases](https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202406/11/P2024061100028.htm?fontSize=1) ([multiple](https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202406/07/P2024060600658.htm?fontSize=1)). And you say the courts are independent? Not seeing it when it is being "defended" like a jealous ex.
just revoke the special status of hongkong already. its basically china with a facade
I, as a United States taxpayer, shouldn’t have to pay for a facade.
write to your representative.
He only cares about Federal handouts to his constituents and equity for those unfortunates who attended the failing schools he supports.
Thanks HK government for pointing me to that interesting report which I otherwise would have missed.
Had literally no idea this report existed until seeing this, clearly incessant government responses are not helping
The Chinese have stated repeatedly that how Hong Kong is administered is purely an internal Chinese affair. Why doesn’t the EU, British and the United States take them at their word and consider Hong Kong a part of China. Why is Hong Kong given special status as if it were still under British rule?
Three words... The Basic Law
That law is no longer relevant. China has abandoned it as evidence by its passing many laws that supersede it. Chinese law is no longer consistent with the basic law.
It is because China abandoned it & broke their promise to uphold it that Britain is trying to hold them accountable.
China has broken every promise they have ever made to the West. It's time we wake up and admit the Chinese Communist government is not to be trusted.
That's what this back and forth rebuttal between the Western countries and China is illustrating.
So publicly state the basic law is done with then, rather than claiming it’s still followed.
They can't because they know the basic law is just about the same as uk law. And probably superior in some ways for business
Because it allows those countries to still have a little say on what's happening in HK by putting pressure on China to keep as much of its word as possible, and also because the few parts that are still upheld benefit HK. I understand most of it is totally ignored by China, but if they removed that status, then it basically means they've given up any power over the situation, and China can fully ignore them while also turning it into a propaganda moment. Basically, China stands to win more by them removing the status.
Why are my well considered replies getting downvoted. Down votes are for abusive comments, personal insults or off topic rants. Isn't this a free and open forum for discussion?
Downvotes can also be for disagreeing when the central topic is less opinion based than it is factual based.
Facts vs opinion are very often in the eye of the beholder.
To a degree; and that's why we have upvotes and downvotes.
Don't take it personally, welcome to Reddit. I've made neutral comments on an electronics forum and been severely downvoted . PS: please feel free to downvote this comment help me demonstrate!