Rioters undermine HK's rule of law

By passing the so-called Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act on Tuesday, the US Senate has turned a blind eye to the violence unleashed by the protesters in Hong Kong over the past more than five months.

To justify their actions, the radical protesters claim they are defending the rule of law in and judicial independence of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. However, as the Law Society of Hong Kong has said, by causing mayhem and "paralyzing access to the Hong Kong International Airport, blocking roads and vandalizing public transport... in open defiance of court injunctions", the rioters have only exposed their hypocrisy.

The rioters' logic of "defending the rule of law by breaking the law" is unacceptable in any society. But instead of reflecting on the mayhem they have committed, the rioters have defended their actions saying they did so in self-defense and in response to the "force" used by Hong Kong police.

The barbaric actions of the rioters include pouring gasoline on a 57-year-old passerby and setting him on fire just because he said, "you are all Chinese". The victim is still in a coma. Among the casualties has been a cleaner (70), who died on Nov 14, two days after being hit by a brick while recording a conflict between rioters and people clearing barricades set up by the demonstrators. And a Japanese tourist in his fifties was beaten black and blue by the rioters, who mistook him for a Chinese mainland resident just because he was taking photos of the violence perpetrated by them.

The rioters have also attacked police officers and police stations with gasoline bombs, stabbed a policeman, and even targeted the families of police officers and bullied their children at school.

Not content with that, the rioters have attacked any Hong Kong resident who holds a political view different from theirs, and used mafia-style intimidation to silence the peaceful majority.

On the pretext of upholding the rule of law, the rioters have violated almost every section of the criminal law. And yet they have the audacity to demand an independent investigation into Hong Kong police and their anti-riot tactics, and the release of all demonstrators who have been arrested and dropping of all charges against them. Their other demands are withdrawal of the extradition amendment bill (which has already been withdrawn), retraction of the word "riots" to describe the violence during the protests, and implementation of "universal suffrage" for Hong Kong Legislative Council and chief executive elections.

That the rioters are seeking amnesty for their crimes shows they don't want Hong Kong to be governed by rule of law but by laws that favor them.

The Hong Kong Bar Association has said that criminal contempt impedes the due administrations of justice and, if unchecked, will inflict grave and irreparable damage to the rule of law in Hong Kong. So the SAR government will never accept the unlawful demands of the rioters.

The violent protesters have become increasingly rigid. They don't entertain dissent in their ranks, and are not ready to listen to the saner voices amongst them who want an end to the violence. Nor do they want to hold talks with the SAR government, which would pave the way for ending the violence and resolve all contentious issues.

A handful of radicals have damaged Hong Kong's image as one of the safest and most inclusive cities in the world. This tiny minority is holding 7 million Hong Kong residents to ransom, which cannot be allowed to continue. The silent majority in Hong Kong should stand up and let their voice be heard. They should publicly condemn the rioters and their actions. The international community, on its part, should stop wavering and denounce the rioters and the violence they have unleashed in Hong Kong.

And the SAR government should take more decisive actions to immediately stop the violence and restore order for the well-being of all Hong Kong residents and the future of Hong Kong.

The author is a researcher at the Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The views don't necessarily represent those of China Daily.