A British Declaration Could Enhance the Next Phase for Democracy in Hong Kong
Now that part one of phase two of the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong is winding down in the streets of the city, freedom advocates could be handsomely rewarded going into the next phase of their demands for greater democracy before 2017, with a declaration from Great Britain that the People's Republic of China has broken the 1984 handover agreement under which Hong Kong was handed to China in 1997.
Anything less of such a declaration from Great Britain or a judicial injunction in Hong Kong, would render as impotent all the struggles by Hong Kong's youths and activists to attain universal suffrage from Beijing, thus leaving the destiny of Hong Kongers to the dictation and will of the communists until 2047.
Defining last summers pro-democracy unofficial referendum for universal suffrage that received hundreds of thousands of support as phase one in the democracy movement, then the present protest by thousands of Hong Kong's students and pro-democracy advocates, must be part one of phase two of the democracy movement. When China failed at the end of summer to allow Hong Kong universal suffrage in the 2017 election for chief city executive, part one of phase two of the democracy movement witnessed thousands of college students joined by secondary school pupils and democracy advocates, occupying the streets around Hong Kong's city center to demonstrate their desires for universal suffrage.
Now that city chief Leung Chun-ying has declined to resign and to have direct talks with protesters, instead delegating the dialogue role with protesters to his deputy, it can be expected that the numbers of demonstrators will decline in the coming hours, hereby giving way to the conclusion of part two of the movement as protesters engage their local government in negotiations toward universal suffrage.
But the grit of the communists will not soften toward Hong Kong's expressed desired reforms. And before democracy seekers enter phase three of their movement, they should come to the realization that their best hope to gaining their desires for universal suffrage, lies within either the judiciary of Great Britain or Hong Kong.
That British Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, Sir Richard Ottaway, has told the BBC that if it was true that a Chinese committee was nominating a "limited number of candidates" for an election, then there appears to be a "prima facie case" that China has breached the undertakings it gave in the 1984 handover agreement; then this possibility holds out merited judicial review in Britain or in Hong Kong as to the legitimacy of the communists' restrictions regarding universal suffrage in Hong Kong. Moreover, a due Westminster inquiry into the developments of events in Hong Kong could arm democracy seekers with the much needed evidence needed to legally bar China from obstructing universal suffrage in Hong Kong.
So, though freedom seekers might be winding down their street expressions toward democracy in Hong Kong, advocates could leave the streets with pride for having exhibited their aspirations, and they could enter the next phase of their democratic demands with sound legal footing to rebuff Beijing's influence prior to the 2017 vote.