[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 10, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E194]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         WASHINGTON POST EDITORIAL ON HONG KONG COURT DECISION

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, February 10, 1999

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member would ask to submit for the 
Record an important editorial that appeared in the February 10, 1999 
Washington Post concerning China's negative reaction to a recent high 
court decision in Hong Kong. The Members of the Task Force on Hong 
Kong, created at your request of former Speaker Gingrich to observe and 
report on conditions in Hong Kong following its reversion to China, are 
closely monitoring these developments. Indeed, the Task Force submitted 
its most recent report to be printed in the February 9, 1999 
Congressional Record.
  It is important to note that the decision by the Hong Kong Court of 
Final Appeals rightly asserts that body's right to interpret Hong Kong 
law for the people of Hong Kong. However, very sensitive issues must 
still be resolved, including how to limit the number of individuals 
seeking permanent entry into Hong Kong and whether it is Hong Kong or 
Beijing that makes the final determination on that number. Most 
importantly, however, this Member hopes that the Beijing authorities 
and the Government of the People's Republic of China will be cognizant 
of the importance of preserving the principles of autonomy and the rule 
of law that underlie the prosperity and liberty of Hong Kong and its 
people.
  Mr. Speaker, this Member asks to insert this excellent editorial in 
the Record.

                     ``Make or Break'' in Hong Kong

       In the 19 months since Hong Kong reverted to China, the 
     worst fears have not come true. Beijing has for the most part 
     kept its hands off the former British colony as promised, 
     allowing Hong Kong to manage its own affairs. Now the two 
     entities may be approaching a crisis that determines whether 
     Hong Kong can maintain substantive independence. It is 
     ``make-or-break time,'' the chairman of Hong Kong's bar 
     association, Ronny Teng, said yesterday.
       A decision by Hong Kong's highest court triggered the 
     confrontation. The decision ostensibly concerned the rights 
     of children born in China to at least one Hong Kong parent to 
     settle in Hong Kong. The court said they could, even if born 
     out of wedlock. But the significance of the decision lay 
     elsewhere, in its legal reasoning. For the first time, the 
     court claimed for itself the authority to interpret Hong Kong 
     law for Hong Kong. On most matters, in other words, the final 
     word should not rest with Beijing. And more than that: Hong 
     Kong laws should be interpreted above all with a deference to 
     Hong Kong autonomy and an understanding that rights and 
     freedoms are ``the essence of Hong Kong's civil society.'' 
     The contrast to China's arbitrary one-party dictatorship 
     could not have been sharper.
       The decision has not sat well in Beijing. Four ``legal 
     experts'' were the first to express dismay. Then Zhao 
     Qizheng, a senior cabinet official, called the decision a 
     mistake. Yesterday a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman in Beijing 
     chimed in, saying the government was ``closely following'' 
     the ruling.
       The idea of ``one country, two systems'' was an experiment 
     from the start. Trying to maintain an island of free 
     enterprise and relative democracy within a Communist state 
     was never going to be easy. But its success is crucial, not 
     only to residents of Hong Kong but to China's credibility in 
     the world and to those nations--such as the United States--
     that pledged to stand up for Hong Kong's freedom.
       Now Beijing officials are threatening that success. Not 
     only Hong Kong's liberty but its prosperity as well is at 
     stake, since local and foreign companies alike will be 
     reluctant to invest in Hong Kong if its rule of law can be 
     compromised and superseded by party apparatchiks in Beijing. 
     The Clinton administration should make clear that it, too, is 
     ``closely following'' developments.

     

                          ____________________