Hong Kongers are trying to get in the mood for Chinese New Year
but, with less than one week to go, many are not succeeding :S
In less than a week from now, the New Year of the Tiger will come along for those who make use of a lunar calendar and observe that which is popularly known as the Chinese zodiac (but.also is known to the Japanese (even though New Year for them falls on January 1st), Vietnamese, South Koreans and a number of other Asians). But while tiger-themed new year decorations have been hung up in many stores and malls already in Hong Kong, many people aren't feeling particularly in the mood to celebrate Chinese new year -- at least not yet.
It doesn't help matters that a number of buildings have been subject to "ambush lockdowns" seemingly nightly for much of this month -- with two overnight ones currently ongoing in Hung Hom and Tsuen Wan, and multi-day-and-night ones ongoing over in Kwai Chung. Such is the strain that people are being subject to, particularly over in that public housing estate at the center of the largest outbreak of Hong Kong's fifth wave that a resident was motivated to go up to the rooftop of one of the blocks at Kwai Chung and attempt to commit suicide. (It most certainly doesn't help matters that fear and paranoia has made it so that some 70 residents of Kwai Chung Estate are being barred from returning to work by their employers after the lockdowns on their buildings had been lifted.)
At a press conference yesterday afternoon, Centre for Health Protection Controller, Dr Edwin Tsui, said yesterday that Hong Kong currently is experiencing both Delta and Omicron variant outbreaks, and the infection risk in the territory is now "very high". And although Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Wong said in an interview with Bloomberg TV just five hours earlier that "Well, I think we are in control of the virus", that clearly is not the case -- with Sophia Chan's boss, Chief Executive Carrie Lam directly contradicting her that very same day!
One positive outcome of all this is that a number of previously vaccine hesitant individuals have gone and got vaccinated in recent days -- including two of my four friends in Hong Kong who had been vaccine holdouts until now. (With regards the two holdouts: one of them would have been willing to get the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine but she's not in the best of health and her doctor recommended that she get Sinovac, which she refuses to have in her body; while the other has multiple objections to getting vaccinated (including her being far more into homeopathy and Chinese medicine than Western medicine) but has told me that she'd feel obliged to get vaccinated if a vaccine bubble formed that would cover her workplace).
Speaking of vaccine bubbles: It was announced yesterday that "The government plans to implement a “vaccine pass” next month, requiring
patrons of certain premises to have received at least one dose of a
Covid-19 vaccine to enter", without any details being given as to what premises they will apply to. While the expectation for some time has been that the "vaccine bubble" will cover restaurants, bars, gyms, cinemas and other venues that have been the subject of social distancing restrictions during the pandemic, there now are reports that the authorities are weighing requiring proof of vaccination to enter shopping malls and go on public transportation too!
The extension of a "vaccine bubble" to include public transportation makes sense if one is thinking purely in terms of pandemic prevention. But because of Hong Kong being the way it now is (i.e., a de facto police state), this possible move strikes me as very worrisome; this not least because over in Mainland China, such a "health code" has been used to restrict the movements of political activists.
For those who believe that there is still rule of law and justice in Hong Kong, consider this: More than 30 pro-democracy politicians and activists have been held behind bars for almost a year now while they await their trial to properly begin. Public figures who had freedom of movement and speech not so long ago, about the only chances most people now have to see them is when they appear in court for hearings that are ostensibly public but whose details journalists are not allowed to report, turning them effectively into "black box" affairs.
In recent days, the 47 individuals arrested back on February 28th of last year for having taken part and/or organized pro-democracy primary elections have been in court for a "committal proceeding". But their actual trial isn't due to begin until 2023 and no reporting of the primary case details is allowed until then. A reminder: they haven't actually been provided with details as to why they have been charged with "subversion" under the national security law that China introduced to Hong Kong. After all, having primary elections to decide who should run for election to the Legilative Council isn't actually illegal in Hong Kong.
Something else that surely isn't actually against the law is to provide medical care and assistance to people. Yet today saw a first aider being convicted of "rioting" (in Wong Tai Sin on October 1st, 2019) along with 10 other individuals by a judge who maintained, among other things, that "no innocent person would
have been at the scene, which... resembled a “mini battleground”,
as protesters had thrown bricks and petrol bombs at police." With regards to the first aider: the judge asserted that "Treating the wounds of protesters
could have increased their confidence, and allowed them to carry on with
their radical acts for longer"!
As a member of the Hong Kong Twitterati commented: "This is just one bad line of an overall bad decision from a judge who doesn't seem to understand how these situations work." Furthermore, "He's jailing people for simply being at the scene of a riot regardless of what they were doing there under the assumption that only rioters would be there. That's like saying there are no innocent people in a war zone, which is not true."
I would agree too that: "Also, "treating the wounds of protesters could have increased their confidence" is like saying if police wound a bank robber, treating his injuries would only just encourage him to rob more banks." In conclusion: "Whatever the judge's intentions, he's basically echoing a typical pro-gov POV: punish anyone who refuses to treat protesters as anything but one-dimensional evil criminals. In any case, it's a heartless decision."
No comments:
Post a Comment