Basic Law

By dave on April 24, 2004 12:09 PM | Permalink

spotted in this mornings SCMP:

Almost everyone in the legal profession has interpreted what is, and what is not, in the Basic Law.

Academics and self-styled experts have done so, the Americans have frequently given their interpretation, and the British often disclose theirs. Even the president of Taiwan has given his comments. Who knows where a further interpretation will come from Africa, the Caribbean or Southeast Asia?

Yet we do not see any protest or objection in Hong Kong about those interpretations. But when the sovereign state makes an interpretation of the Basic Law, there is so much fuss and protest.

I am very confused. Why is it acceptable for every Tom, Dick and Harry to interpret the Basic Law, but it is not all right for our own country to do so? Now I feel fed up.

CHANG CHHANG-SAN, Causeway Bay

Because when other countries 'interperet' the Basic Law, they're just stating an opinion, when China 'interperets' the Basic Law, they are changing it to suit themselves.

Unsolicited Bulk Email (spam), commercial solicitations, SEO related items, link exchange requests, and abuse are not welcome here and will result in complaints to your ISP.
email the webmaster
Any email to the above address may be made public at the sole discretion of the recipient.