policing-in-hong-kong-history-and-reform-kam-c-in

viii

Contents

ix

Contents

vii

Contents
Dedication xv
Foreword xvii
Series Editor��s Preface xix
Prologue xxi
Author xxix
Introduction xxxiii
Part
I


COLONIAL POLICING WITH CHINESE CHARACTERISTICS
1 Study of Policing in Hong Kong 3
Introduction 3
Focus and Organisation 4
I: Police Study in Hong Kong: A Brief History 4
Introduction 4
II: Research Output 11
Thesis/Dissertations/Articles 11
Academic Books and Monographs 13
Textbooks 14
Popular Readings 15
NGO Reports 20
III: Studying Policing in Hong Kong: Problems and Issues 21
IV: Conclusion 24
Endnotes 25
2 Debating Colonial Policing 35
Introduction 35
I: Concept of Colonial Policing 38
Defining Colonialism 38
Colonial HKP: Context Matters 41
Study of Colonial Police 44
II: Deconstructing Colonial Policing 45
Introduction 45
A: Colonial Police in Multiple Forms 47
One Crown Colony�XMany Colonial Policing 47
B: Colonial Policing as ��People�� Policing 49
One Crown Colony�XMany Kinds of Colonial Officials 49
Many Colonial Personalities 49
Independent Colonial Officials 51
Middle-Class British Cadets 52
Working-Class Europeans 55
Adventurous Expatriate Souls 56
Ambivalent Local Officers 57
Many Colonised People 62
C: Colonial Policing as ��Pluralistic�� Policing 62
D: Colonial Policing as ��Collaborative�� Policing 64
E: Colonial Policing as ��Discretionary�� Policing 69
F: Colonial Policing as ��More or Less��
Governmental Control 70
III: True Nature of Colonial Policing 70
Colonial HKP Is Not Monolithic, Omnipresent and.Omnipotent 70
Colonial Policing Is Not Anti-Local 71
True Nature of Colonial Policing in Hong Kong 73
IV: Conclusion 73
Endnotes 76
3 Assessing Colonial Policing 89
Introduction 89
I: Framework of Analysis 90
II: A Cultural Model of Analysis 93
Reflecting on Conflict Theory 93
Return of Human Agency 93
Assessment Standards 94
III: Theoretical Assessment of the HKP: Colonial Policing and.Political Legitimacy 95
Introduction 95
The Debate 96
A Political Legitimacy Test Defined 98
Why and What ��Legitimacy�� Test for Colonial Policing? 99
Hong Kong People Can Define Legitimacy Differently 100
Conceptualising ��Legitimacy�� 100
Measuring ��Fairness�� 101
Hong Kong People Can Accept ��Colonial Policing�� without Legitimacy 103
Cross-Cultural Law Enforcement 107
A Chinese Legitimacy Test 108
IV: Empirical Assessment: HKP Chinese Officers on HKP 108
Introduction 108
Confucianism and HKP Free Speech 111
Research Data Overview 112
On Wisdom of Colonial Rule 114
On HKP Discipline 115
On Rule of Law 118
On Accommodating Alien Culture 120
Seeking Truth: Integrating Culture, Science and Experience 121
On Dealing with Adversities (under British Rule) 122
Concluding Thoughts 124
V: Conclusion 128
Endnotes 129
4 Policing with Hong Kong Characteristics 137
Introduction 137
I: Colonial Policing as Policing Chinese 139
II: Colonial Policing as Chinese Policing 143
Social Control Organisation and Philosophy 144
Social Control Principles 146
Chinese Jurisprudential Ideas and Ideal: ��Qing Li Fa�� 147
Supremacy of ��Qing�� over ��Li�� 148
How Judges Apply ��Qing-Li-Fa�� 148
III: Colonial Policing as Self-Help Policing 149
Self-Help Policing in Chinese Philosophy 149
Self-Help Policing as Imperial Rule 151
Self-Help Policing before the British 152
Chinese Theory of Self-Help 153
SRT Theoretical Statements 154
Definitions 154
Radical Theory of Policing 155
Policing from People��s Perspective 155
Legalisation of People��s Problems 156
Discussion 157
Application 158
IV: Colonial Policing as Policing Migrant 165
V: Colonial Policing as Relationship (Guanxi) Policing 166
Juvenile versus Adult Debate 166
Terrorist versus Criminal Controversy 167
Policing Relationship: Strangers versus Intimates 168
Relationship Policing: Rural versus Urban 168
VI: Conclusion 169
Endnotes 171
Part
II


POLICE REFORM IN 1950S
5 Police Reform Literature 189
Introduction 189
I: Police Reform 189
Why Police Reform? 189
Typologies of Police Reform 190
Nostalgic Reform 191
Normative Reform 191
Progressive Reform 192
Critical Reform 193
Political Reform 193
Forces of Change 194
How to Conduct Police Reform? 195
Accountable to What, Whom and How? 195
Impact of Police Reform 196
How to Assess HKP Reform? 196
II: HKP Reform Inquiries 199
The Caldwell Commission (1858) 199
The Police Commission (1871) 200
Sir Alastair Blair-Kerr Commission (1973) 203
The LRC: Report on Arrest (1992) 207
The Coopers & Lybrand Consultant Report (1993) 207
Lan Kwai Fong (LKF) Disaster Report (1993) 210
Hong Kong Audit Commission Audit of HKP 213
Station Improvement and Amalgamation Projects (April.2005) 214
III: Conclusion 215
Endnotes 216
6 Policing in Colonial Hong Kong 227
Introduction 227
I: Policing with Colonial Characteristics 227
II: Historical Developments of the HKP 229
III: Colonial Policing: Continuity and Change 232
Inspector Quincey (1870�V1890) 232
Analysis 237
CIP Reynolds (1910�V1932) 238
Analysis 241
Chief Inspector Andrew (1912�V1938) 241
Analysis 244
IV: Police Reformers 246
V: Conclusion 250
Endnotes 251
7 Formation of Hong Kong Police in the 1840s 257
Introduction 257
I: Crimes in Hong Kong 257
II: Crime Control Measures 258
III: Policing in Hong Kong 259
IV: Formation of Hong Kong Police Force: The Legal.Framework261
Introduction 261
The Legal Framework 261
Police Force Ordinance (1844) 261
Native Chinese Peace Officer Ordinance (1844) 264
Justice of Peace Ordinance (1844) 266
Gaming Ordinance (1844) 266
Distillation of Spirits Ordinance (1844) 268
Registry and Census of the Inhabitants Ordinance (1844) 269
Preservation of Good Order and Cleanliness Ordinance.(1844) 270
V: The Police Laws and Role of HKP 271
VI: Police Leadership and Policing in Hong Kong 273
VII: Conclusion 276
Endnotes 277
8 HKP Reform in the 1950s: Context and.Framework 283
Introduction 283
I: Research Data 285
II: Contexts of Reform 286
A. Social Context 286
B. Political Context 287
C. Cultural Context 288
D. Law and Order Context 288
E. Wei Ji (Danger and Opportunity) 289
F. United Kingdom Thinking: China Factor 290
G. Refugee Problem 292
H. WWII Impact 293
III: Direction of Reform 294
Introduction 294
A. 1947 HKP Commissioner Report 294
B. 1957 Annual Police Review 296
C. Colonial Agenda 297
D. Legislative Agenda 297
Economy and Reform297
Human Rights and Reform298
E. Operational Agenda 299
F. Expert Opinion 300
Discussion 301
IV: Process and Measures of Reform 303
A: Decolonisation 303
Decolonisation without Being Decolonised 303
Decolonisation and Differentiate Policing 304
Decolonisation Model 306
Decolonisation and Penal Policy 307
Decolonisation and Social Service 308
Decolonisation and Confucianisation of Policing 309
B: Localisation 313
Disengagement 313
Delegation 314
Collaboration 315
Customisation 318
Assimilation 319
Localisation Efforts before WWII 320
V: Conclusion 324
Endnotes 324
9 HKP Reform: The 1950s 341
Introduction 341
I: Localisation 342
Localisation 342
Colonial Policy of Localisation 343
Localisation after WWII 344
Reflection 354
II: Legalisation 354
Shum Hung vs. Tam Fun (1961) HKCA 1; CACC338/1961 (11 November 1961) 360
Analysis 362
Re Yeung Lam (1968) HKCFI 40; HCMP135/1968 (18.September 1968) 364
Analysis 366
Wong Ching Yuen vs. the Queen (1900) HKCA 13; CACC278/1972 (Judgement Date Unknown) 369
Analysis 369
III: Modernisation 369
Formation 383
Leadership 384
Training 385
Role and Treatment 385
Frontline Observations 387
From Academic Studies 388
Issues 391
Self-Promotion of HKP 394
IV: Communalisation 396
V: Organisation 406
Bureaucratisation 407
Standardise Administration 407
Diversified and Customised Operations 408
Command and Control 408
Research on Command and Control: Policy Formulation.and Implementation 408
Anecdotal Evidence of Divisional Control 410
All Policing Are Local 413
Policing for All Seasons and Reasons 413
Policing in KLN City 414
Policing in SSP 416
Policing in YMT Division 418
Policing in NT Division 420
Policing the Border 421
Policing the Peak 422
VI: HKP Voices 423
On Police Reform Measures 424
On Police�VPublic Relationship 426
On Police Self-Image 427
VII: Conclusion 429
Introduction 429
Intellectual Challenge 431
Analytical Framework Proposed: Methodological Individualism 432
Human-to-Human Interface 432
Colonialism as Negotiation: It Takes Two to Tango 433
Cross-Cultural Negotiating: Case of CIP Annieson 433
Chief Inspector Anthony Annieson (1956�V1978) 434
Themes and Contributions 435
Future Research 439
Endnotes 440

xv

For my sister, Po Po
The joy of my life

xviii

Foreword

xvii

Foreword
Kam Wong and I joined the Royal Hong Kong Police (RHKP) in the 1960s. This was a decade that witnessed major social and political upheavals. We witnessed firsthand the Star Ferry riots in 1966, sparked by an increase in ferry fares and the 1967�V1968 confrontations prompted by China��s Cultural Revolution which saw large-scale rioting, civil disturbances and a wave of bomb attacks directed at the government.
Kam Wong��s book, Policing in Hong Kong: History and Reform, traces the origin of the Hong Kong Police from its beginning in 1841 and chronicles its various developmental phases which lead to its present form�Xa strong, closely knit police force fully equipped for its modern duties. I am delighted that my old colleague and friend has invited me to write a foreword to this book. This is a subject area that has fascinated me, not only as a former RHKP officer but also as a scholar at both Hong Kong University and later, at Cambridge University.
My academic interest in the subject of policing can be said to have begun while I was on attachment to London��s Metropolitan Police Force in 1974. Having already witnessed, firsthand, the large-scale riots in Hong Kong in 1967, I was given the opportunity to watch the Metropolitan Police��s anti-riot training. What amazed me was the total lack of suitable anti-riot equip-ment and tactics: the officers were dressed in conventional police uniforms with their traditional ��bobby�� helmets and, although armed with transparent shields, appeared reluctant to raise them for protection when confronting the make-believe rioters. This highlighted a desire on the part of the British police to maintain their traditional image as ��civilian in uniform�� despite the evidence from Hong Kong and elsewhere that a more military-style posture was needed to deal effectively with such public order situations. The subse-quent Brixton Riots in 1981 which saw 280 police officers injured and another 45 civilian casualties, the growing threat from, first, Irish-inspired, and then, Islamic terrorism and more recently, the scenes of rioting and looting in inner London, have led to the gradual militarisation of the British police forces. There are now more specialist armed police units and more aggres-sive and better equipped anti-riot formations, signalling an albeit reluctant departure from the traditional ��civilian in uniform�� model of British policing.
In contrast, the Hong Kong police have been gradually moving away from their colonial police antecedent as a wholly para-military force to a more conventional civilian establishment. As an ex-British colony, Hong Kong��s police developed on a similar manner to other British colonial police forces. This development process has been commented on by Sir Charles Jeffries, a noted police historian, who, in a study of the colonial policing system in 1952, noted that colonial policing evolved through three distinct phases: the first phase being one of ��improvisation�� where policing activities were directed towards securing the basic essentials of law and order. The second phase brought about the establishment of semi-military constabulary forces modelled upon the Royal Irish Constabulary, a force which combined civil-ian policing duties with an armed response capability that could be used in support of the military. The final phase resulted in the conversion of a semi-military constabulary into a civilian police structure similar to the British ��civilian in uniform�� tradition. According to Sir Charles Jefferies, this transi-tion resulted from the need to cope with changes in society brought about by modernisation, Westernisation and decolonisation. However, Jefferies did not touch upon the likely problems confronting a para-military police organisation during its period of transition to a civilian constabulary. This is an issue, which both Kam Wong and I had hoped to study and write about in respect of the Hong Kong police, but time and other commitments meant that I could not join him in this endeavour. So, it was with a great deal of plea-sure and not a little guilt that I learned that Kam Wong had decided to forge ahead and complete a book�XPolicing in Hong Kong: History and Reform�Xwhich, while not wholly focused on the issue of transition, deals with aspects that have impacted on the Hong Kong Police Force��s development against a background of political, social and economic change. Although, there have been a number of publications on the Hong Kong Police, and Kam Wong��s book is by no means a definite study of the Force, it is one of a very few schol-arly books combining an academic as well as a professional perspective on a Police Force still in transition.
I highly recommend this book to those who are as interested as I am in the history, development and transformation of the Hong Kong Police.
Douglas Tsui Yiu Kwong
Chief Superintendent (Retired)
RHKP

xx

Series Editor��s Preface

xix

Series Editor��s Preface
While the literature on police and allied subjects is growing exponentially, its impact upon day-to-day policing remains small. The two worlds of research and practice of policing remain disconnected even though cooperation between the two is growing. A major reason is that the two groups speak in different languages. The research work is published in hard-to-access journals and presented in a manner that is difficult to comprehend for a lay person. However, the police practitioners tend not to mix with researchers and remain secretive about their work. Consequently, there is little dialogue between the two and almost no attempt to learn from one another. Dialogues across the globe, among researchers and practitioners situated in different continents, are of course even more limited.
I attempted to address this problem by starting the IPES, www.ipes.info, where a common platform has brought the two together. IPES is now in its 17th year. The annual meetings that constitute most major annual event of the organisation have been hosted in all parts of the world. Several publica-tions have come out of these deliberations and a new collaborative commu-nity of scholars and police officers has been created whose membership runs into several hundreds.
Another attempt was to begin a new journal, aptly called Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, PPR that has opened the gate to prac-titioners to share their work and experiences. The journal has attempted to focus upon issues that help bring the two on a single platform. PPR is com-pleting its 12 years in 2011. It is certainly an evidence of growing collabora-tion between police research and practice that PPR, which began with four issues a year, expanded into five issues in its fourth year and, now, it is issued six times a year.
Clearly, these attempts, despite their success, remain limited. Conferences and journal publications do help create a body of knowledge and an associa-tion of police activists but cannot address substantial issues in depth. The limitations of time and space preclude larger discussions and more authori-tative expositions that can provide stronger and broader linkages between the two worlds.
It is this realisation of the increasing dialogue between police research and practice that has encouraged many of us�Xmy close colleagues and I connected closely with IPES and PPR across the world�Xto conceive and implement a new attempt in this direction. I am now embarking on a book series, Advances in Police Theory and Practice, that seeks to attract writers from all parts of the world. Further, the attempt is to find practitioner con-tributors. The objective is to make the series a serious contribution to our knowledge of the police as well as to improve police practices. The focus is not only in work that describes the best and successful police practices but also one that challenges current paradigms and breaks new ground to pre-pare a police for the twenty-first century. The series seeks for comparative analysis that highlights achievements in distant parts of the world as well as one that encourages an in-depth examination of specific problems confront-ing a particular police force.
Dr. Kam Wong��s Policing in Hong Kong: History and Reform exemplifies what this Series seeks to offer. This author, a former Inspector of Hong Kong Police (HKP) and an attorney from the U.S., has provided us with a critical study of the Hong Kong Police in the colonial (1850s) era as well as during the decolonization periods (1950s). The book makes two claims. First, British colonial policing in Hong Kong must come to terms with local conditions and indigenous culture, best understood as ��policing with Chinese charac-teristics.�� Second, fundamental Hong Kong Police reform began in 1950s as a post-WWII modernization initiative, and not in 1997 as a result of rever-sion of political sovereignty to China. The book challenges our conventional understanding of HKP. In so doing, it is hoped that it invites robust debate and further inquiry.
It is hoped that through this series it will be possible to accelerate the process of building knowledge about policing and help bridge the gap between the two worlds�Xthe world of police research and police practice. This is an invitation to police scholars and practitioners across the world to come and join in this venture.
Dilip K. Das, PhD
Founding President, International Police Executive Symposium
http://www.ipes.info
Series Editor, Advances in Police Theory and Practice
(CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group)
Series Editor, Interviews with Global Leaders in Police, Courts, and Prisons
(CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group)
Series Editor, PPR Special Issues as Books
(Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group)
Founding Editor-in-Chief, Police Practice and Research:
An International Journal (Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group)
http://www.tandfonline.com/GPPR

xxii

Prologue

xxiii

Prologue

xxi

Prologue
I write Policing in Hong Kong: History and Reform as much for myself as for others. It is a project of the heart, more so than that of the head. For me, Policing in Hong Kong: History and Reform is a journey of discovery, not a destiny. The journey began with me joining the HKP. Below I will share with you what this journey of discovery entails, reveals and forebodes, finishing with a section on ��How to do scholarship.��
An Intellectual Journey to Nowhere and Everywhere
In the 1960s, I joined the Royal Hong Kong Police. With my colleagues, locals and expatriates, we kept ourselves busy fighting crime, keeping order, and serving the community; living the dream of our lives.
As Chinese officers from Hong Kong, our dreams knew no bounds. Like young people everywhere, we were idealistic and energetic. We were in love with the HKP. We challenged each other to do better as a person, officer and citizen. To that end, we asked 10,000 questions, about the HKP, about Hong Kong, and most importantly, about ourselves:
Is the HKP a colonial force? Is colonialism a blessing or a curse for Hong Kong? Is there a need for a para-military force in a civil society? Is it fair to promote expatriate officers ahead of Chinese ones? How does one improve communication between British and Chinese, within and without the HKP? How does one eradicate institutionalised corruption within the HKP and in the society? How does one make the HKP more accountable to commu-nity? How can British police officers function effectively in a Chinese society, without coming to terms with its culture and custom? How can a Chinese in good conscience serve as a British colonial police officer, without severing his ethnic link and diluting the community bond?
In time and after the 1967 riots, HKP officers were called ��yellow run-ning dog�� (Chinese officers) or ��white skin pig�� (British officers). We were also honoured as the ��Royal�� Hong Kong Police, afterward. The year 1967 was a defining moment with the HKP. The 1967 riot pulled us together, giving the HKP a shared identity, and newfound respectability.
With 1967 on our backs, we discovered that as HKP officers we had more in common as humans than differences as nationals. That is not to say there was no discrimination, on both sides (British vs. Chinese) and at either ends (HKP and Hong Kong people). It just means that we did not allow racial animus to come between us, in doing what was right for Hong Kong and by the HKP. This rather obscure but important observation informs most of my thinking about colonial policing in Hong Kong, the central focus of this book.
In my unrelenting quest for understanding, I found more questions than answers, and answers beget more questions. Soon, I found that my curiosity out ran my experience, knowledge and capacity. I also found that, however hard I tried to understand my work, the public were not as appre-ciative of my effort and certainly did not share in my understanding. I was frustrated.
Frustration (��strain��) is the mother of all adaptations. Some of my col-leagues became bitter. Others became stoic. Still others reached out for inno-vations (education). Many of my colleagues stayed with the HKP to pursue professional development overseas and higher learning in Hong Kong. I left HKP to study forensics and became a lawyer in the United States. The self-enrichment process opened my eyes and broadened my vision. In time it changed my thinking and outlook. I was ready to rejoin the HKP, but the HKP was not ready for me. I promised to return one day; now I have, with this book. Time has changed. HKP has changed. I am welcomed as a valuable resource instead of being dismissed as an ill-fitting specimen.
After practising law for a number of years in the United States and over-seas, I decided to pursue a PhD at Albany. Due to my professional experience and scholarly interest, I focused on cross-cultural policing. That was in the late 1980s.
Thirty odd years later I become an expert in comparative policing, with China and Hong Kong as the home base. My agenda is to bridge the gap between East and West. Intellectually, I see the need to dampen the scorched earth approach of aggressive cultural imperialism, in favour of a more critical but balanced and nuanced post-modernist style of inquiry. Multiculturalism is in my blood. Personally, my interest is pricked by my failed cross-cultural marriage. I need to bring some closure to that part of my life. This part of my intellectual journey tells me what, how and why we think about issues depends less on logic and facts, but experience and appre-ciation; that is, cultural awareness, not scientific analysis, holds the key to the understanding of colonial policing and HKP reform. Here I say nothing more than what Justice Holmes has imparted: ��The life of law has not been logic, but experience.��
The goal that I set for myself is a difficult one, bordering on being impos-sible. For anti-cultural warriors of all persuasions, the challenges are in fight-ing ethnocentrism and mediating ��clash of civilisations��. The lessons I learned from my lifelong engagement with cross-cultural affairs fill the pages of this book. The most important one being: in conducting cross-cultural research, such as depicting, characterising, debating and assessing colonial policing, we should withhold judgment and get away from generalisations. We should let the facts speak for themselves, preferably by listening to the people who are involved or afflicted by inter-cultural exchanges, with empathy, identifi-cation, immersion and sublimation.
In terms of methods: induction and not deduction; bottom up and not top down; up close and not afar, and involved not detached. In terms of per-spective: insiders and not outsiders, practitioners and not theoreticians, and commoners and not experts. In terms of observations: particularisation over generalisation, details over abstractions, and pragmatics over utopia. In sum, understanding human affairs starts with what everyday life can teach us, and not what a few scientific inquiries have instilled in us (evidence-based this or that notwithstanding).
In the early 1980s, I returned to Hong Kong to conduct research at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. The Sino-British negotiation over the future of Hong Kong beyond 1997 had just started. Driven by such a water-shed political event in the making, my research interest in the HKP natu-rally turned to how the HKP as a colonial force under British rule could be transformed into a civil community service agency under Chinese admin-istration. Together with other Hong Kong criminal justice professionals we started the Hong Kong Society of Criminology (1983), as a platform to share information and exchange ideas. The seed for Hong Kong criminology study was planted.
In the 1990s, I returned to Hong Kong a second time, teaching public law at Chinese University of Hong Kong. By this time, the political future of Hong Kong had been settled under the Basic Law. My research interest shifted to how the transfer of political sovereignty under ��one country two systems�� might affect HKP organisation, control and operations? To address such and other issues, I organised the first international policing conference in Hong Kong as President of the Asian Association of Police Studies (AAPS). The AAPS conference officially launched the study of policing in Hong Kong, as an academic discipline.
As 1997 got closer, the HKP leadership was much concerned with ��brain drain�� from the HKP, due to political and economic reasons. As a polic-ing scholar, I was more optimistic about the future prospect of HKP under Chinese rule. Many of my ex-colleagues, however, were worried; for example, one-time Special Branch officers or long-time career officers. When asked, I observed that the HKP would change after 1997 for the better, on its own terms and in its own way. I was proven right. As I make clear in this book, the HKP is a battle-tested professional organisation, with strong leadership, competent staff and deep culture. Coming to change and reform, the HKP is a continuously learning and reforming agency in pursuit of organisational excellence, after the Second World War (1950s). Viewed in this light, the 1997 HKP reform was an extension of 1950s reform, not a brand new adventure into uncharted territories.
Now (2014), some 45 years later, I am back at it again, asking questions about the HKP. This time with hindsight, I try to prospect what the HKP will be like in the future, in concrete terms.
What is the role of the HKP in protecting China��s security interests in Hong Kong; for example, protecting the Chinese Prime Minister inside HKU? How should frontline HKP officers face up to radicalised youth or empowered public, such as in reacting to disrespectful citizens, insulting -protestors and intimating Triads? How should the HKP be prepared to deal with a new form of public disorder, that is, ��colored revolution�� by students? How prepared is the HKP in dealing with Western-incited violence; for example, ��non-violent revolution�� (a la Dr. Gene Sharp)? More fundamentally, how can the HKP steer clear of the infectious storm of politicisation and the accompanying waves of volative social movement(s), now in full force?
This time, I am more prepared to reflect on such weighty issues. But the issues are also getting more complex and difficult. It is at this juncture that I start to pen the Policing in Hong Kong: History and Reform book.
Focus, Thesis, Findings
Policing in Hong Kong: History and Reform asks two kinds of questions: In what ways was the HKP a colonial police force? When did the HKP shed its colonial colour, and how?
As a thesis, from my vantage point as a HKP officer and now a policing scholar, I do not share in the conventional wisdom that colonial policing was brutal and abusive, in every way imaginable. Rather I am of the opin-ion that Hong Kong residents, British and Chinese alike, of necessity or due to utility, worked together to co-produce law and order in Hong Kong. With that supposition, I argue that in order to understand the HKP and policing in Hong Kong we must first engage in people-watching: studying their history and culture, ways and means, feeling and thinking. More to the point, we must understand how the British worked with the Chinese in policing Hong Kong. By seeking to understand this relationship, I discov-ered the first principle of colonial policing in Hong Kong: British colonial officers (who were in the minority) had no hope of ruling over the colonised majority (i.e. the Hong Kong people) without coming to terms with their history, culture and customs. Successful administration of a people is best negotiated, never imposed. In the words of my high school teacher at St. Paul��s Boys College (Hong Kong): ��Happy people do not revolt. Unhappy people always do.��
With the above insight I started to research the book. What I found does not surprise me. The Hong Kong people accepted British rule not because it was politically legitimate but because the HKP delivered what the people wanted, especially after 1950, that is: law and order, safety and security, sta-bility and prosperity. This allowed the Hong Kong people to make money, enjoy life and raise their families in a carefree manner. As for corruption and Triads, they were necessary evils of an alien rule and transient society. This was regrettable but not dysfunctional, given the historical circumstances that colonised Hong Kong. In essence, the HKP achieved performance legitimacy, though not political legitimacy. Pragmatism, not ideology, ruled the day.
As to historical development of colonial policing, from inception and at ground zero, the HKP did not behave like a colonial police force. Indeed, for much of the time, the HKP practised ��dual�� administration and ��collab-orative�� rule. An integrated�Xunified and uniform�Xthe HKP administration and operation did not exist before the Second World War.
As I point out in the book, policing has never been a one-size-fits-all operation. With the colonial HKP, policing the Peak (��little England��) was not the same as policing Kowloon Walled City (��three lawless zone�� �T����) and far cry from policing Kwun Tong (��barbaric place�� ���f��). This sug-gests that the HKP adjusted their operations based on local conditions, a far-fetched idea for ideologues and colonialism basher.
As to the HKP reform, the rebuilding of HKP after the Second World War was a defining moment in the HKP��s developmental history. By the time I joined the police in the mid-1960s, the HKP has transformed itself into a modern, professional, communal force, with very little vestiges of colonialism left, except perhaps paramilitary organisational style and corruption practice. There was even a Chinese police force run by the CID staff sergeants. It is here that the current book makes the most contribution to the study of the HKP. The Chinese in Hong Kong have always found ways to police themselves, under Colonial administration, if the British looked the other way.
Contributions
Altogether, the book makes the following observations about the HKP:
First, the HKP��s reform in the 1950s gave Hong Kong a fully integrated police force across all areas (Hong Kong, Kowloon, New Territories, Water) and functions (UB, CID, SB, PTS, PTU, EU), with central administration in PHQ (Commissioner of Police), decentralised command at District level (District Superintendent) and delegated control at Sub-Division level (SDI).
Second, the decolonisation of the HKP started in 1950s, which gave us a fully integrated police force with British and Chinese working side by side (��localisation��).
Third, the decolonisation and modernisation of the HKP started in 1950s with the introduction of CSI, evidence-based policing, problem-oriented policing and community-oriented policing.
Fourth, Chinese policing Chinese in colonial Hong Kong started with the District Watch Force in 1860s and blossomed into the Four CID Staff Sergeants era between 1950 and 1974.
Finally, the uniqueness of this book is in providing the readers with an external as well as internal views of HKP, as supported by indigenous theo-ries and informed with local data; a first in Hong Kong policing research.
How Does One Do Scholarship?
I am often asked how I do scholarship: what subject matters I study; how I engage in research; in essence, what the tricks of the trade are; the prestige of research if you like.
The subject matter: Before I close, I think it is best to share with you how I pick my intellectual journeys, including this one. If you are like me who is drawn to serendipitious discoveries, it is best to consult Robert Frost��s (1874�V1963) poem: ��The Road Not Taken��:
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;
Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,
And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I�X
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
My research agenda has prompted me to find out all that I do not know, that is, what is ��unknown-unknown��, instead of seeking to elaborate on what is ��known-known�� or discover what is ��known-unknown��.
How I do research? The ultimate measure of good scholarship, you ask? To me, scholarship is a private love affair conducted behind closed doors, as a life course and life style. The process consists of a prolonged period of pas-sionate liaisons mixed with cool discernment, away from the temperamental and tempestuous crowd. In the finest tradition of Chinese cooking: ��Soup (ideas) is to be simmered, never boiled.��
There you have it: passion, discernment, and patience makes for good scholarship.
Acknowledgements
Research and writing is a lonely job. But that is not to say that I do this book all by myself. Quite to the contrary, this book is very much a joint venture. Many ex-colleagues and former students helped me with data. More than a few scholars acted as sounding board for my ideas. A few police experts, from Hong Kong and around the world, read the manuscript and provided for valuable feedbacks. Then, there are hundreds of authors whose published work I consulted, interrogated and debated as I went about putting the trea-tise together. I cannot recognise them all, because the list is really that long. All that I can offer is a big thank you. This project could not have seen the light of day without their kind and selfless support. If I have my way, all their names would appear as co-authors. All the same, their contributions are detailed in the corpus and detail footnotes, which is the next best thing I can do.
I would be remiss if I do not name four individuals, who played an active part in compiling this book. First, I want to thank CSP Douglas Tsui of HKP (retired) for gracing this book with a Foreword. CSP Tsui was one of my clos-est colleagues at HKP, now a lifelong friend. Second, I want to thank my son, Mr Wong Chi-on for proofreading the manuscript, making it more error free. Third, I want to thank my wife, Rainbow Wong for putting up with my erratic writing schedule, and supporting me in every turn, from meeting publisher deadlines to softening writer��s blue.
Last but not least, I want to thank my sister Po Po Wong who kept me company, by Skype or at heart, in those long sleepless nights, when I was short of ideas, and ran out of patience. Her ever present, pleasant smiles always saved my nights. She is a joy of our family. This book is dedicated to her and her family.
Part of the content, issues and ideas of this book have been presented at the Department of Sociology (Criminology), Hong Kong University, School of Law, Chinese University of Hong Kong, School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, School of Law, University of Chicago, School of Law, University of Washington. I thank the participants of the above semi-nars and talks for their valuable feedbacks.
Last, I would like to thank Xavier University for providing me with a most pleasant and supportive environment to conduct my research and write this book. I would also like to thank Jennifer Stair at Taylor & Francis, Karthick Parthasarathy and editorial staff from Techset Composition for help in publication and editing the manuscript.
Kam C. Wong
CLC Library, XU

xxx

Author

xxxi

Author

xxix

Author
Professor Kam C. Wong teaches at the Department of Criminal Justice, Xavier University, Cincinnati, Ohio; where he once was a chairperson. Concurrently, he is a faculty fellow at the School of Criminal Justice, SUNY�VAlbany, New York. Dr. Wong earned his bachelor of arts with honors, J.D. from Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana; as well as a PhD in crimi-nal justice from SUNY�VAlbany, where he received the Remington Award for Distinguished Work in Law and Social Science.
An Inspector of Police with the Hong Kong Police, Dr. Wong was awarded the Commissioner��s High Commendation, and for 20 years, was a black belt karate instructor.
Professor Wong was a former Managing Attorney of the Legal Service Corporation in Michigan and Corporate Counsel for Everex, a public listed company. He was the director of the Chinese Law Program at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. He also served as the vice president (1999�V2000) at the Center for Criminology, Hong Kong University and vice chair (2000�V2002) at the Hong Kong Society of Criminology. Currently, he is a Honorary Fellow at the Center for Criminology at Hong Kong University.
Professor Wong published over 100 articles and 10 books, in 10 coun-tries, which appeared in Police Quarterly; Columbia Journal of Asian Law; Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy; Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology; British Journal of Criminology; Asian Journal of Criminology; Australian Journal of Law and Society; China Perspective (French); Crime Review (Korea); China Review; Herald of Law (Yugoslavia); International Journal of the Sociology of Law; Criminal Law Bulletin; Journal of Information Law & Technology; Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal; John Marshall Journal of Computer and Information Law, Education and Law Journal, Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law, Michigan Journal of Race & Law, among others.
Professor Wong was the managing editor for Police Practice and Research: An International Journal. He was the editor-in-chief for Working Paper Series, International Police Executive Symposium; editor, Journal of Crime and Delinquency; editor, Zhejiang Police College Journal (International Division, PR China). He is currently on the editorial board of the Beijing Law Review, International Journal of Comparative Criminology, Open Journal of Law, as well as Open Journal of Sociology and Asian Policing.
Professor Wong was an organiser and founding member of the Asian Association of Police Studies, of which he was also the vice president (2001�V2002) and president (2002�V2003). He is the founding board member of the Asia Criminological Society; Pakistan Society of Criminology; Asian School of Management and Technology (India); and the South Asian Society of Criminology and Victimology.
Professor Wong��s latest books include: USA PATRIOT ACT: The Impact of USA Patriot Act on American Society: An Evidence Based Assessment (Hauppauge, New York: Nova Science Publishers, 2007); The Making of USA Patriot Act: Legislation, Implementation, Impact (Beijing: China Law Press, 2008); Chinese Policing: History and Reform (New York: Peter Lang, 2009); Police Reform in China (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2012); Cyberspace Governance in China (New York: Nova Science Publications, 2012); Policing in Hong Kong (Farnham, Surrey, UK: Ashgate, 2012), Policing in China (Pakistan: Pakistan Society of Criminology, 2012), Policing in Hong Kong: History and Reform (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2012) and The Study of Policing in Hong Kong (London and New York: Palgrave, 2016) (under review). His current project is ��Public Order Policing in China: The Case of Umbrella Resistant in Hong Kong�� (2013�V2017).
Professor Wong is a legal consultant to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada on Chinese law issues. He is an expert consultant to U.K. Beirut Police Integrity Workshop, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime on illicit financial flows resulting from transnational organised crime and an expert observer at the United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders. He is a foreign expert to the Ministry of Public Security, People��s Republic of China and trainer/consultant to the Hong Kong Police.
Professor Wong was on the advisory board of the Yale in China�XLaw program. He was a visiting scholar/fellow at Scarman Centre, University of Leicester, United Kingdom as well as a visiting scholar at the Institute of Criminology, Cambridge University, United Kingdom; Cyberspace Institute, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA; Chinese People��s Public Security University, Beijing, China; Zhejiang Provincial Police College, Hangzhou Zhejiang, China; Hubei Provincial Police College, Hubei Province, PR China; and the Hunan Police Officer College and Chinese Armed Police Force College, PR China.
Professor Wong has been a regular columnist on law and order issues with the Hong Kong Standard (1998), South China Morning Post (1999), Hong Kong Economic Journal (2000) and Apple Daily (2001). He also contributed to the Far Eastern Economic Review, Apple Daily and other major newspapers in Hong Kong. He is a media consultant on Chinese and Hong Kong law with RTHK, Commercial Radio, Radio Free Asia, CCTV, TVB, ATV, CNN, NPR, AP, Reuters, Australian National Radio, Financial Times, Washington Post and Guardian. In 2002, he was an editor/columnist for Crime Review, a web-based crime and justice journal organised by the faculty of the Korea National Police University.

xxxiv

Introduction

xxxv

Introduction

xxxiii

Introduction
The future of Hong Kong cannot but be built on its past. It is our belief that as Hong Kong looks forward, it must also make a dispassionate assessment of its experience under British rule.
David Faure (ed.), A Documentary History of Hong Kong Society (1997)
Introduction
The Hong Kong Police (HKP) is 172 years old (1842�V2014). It is a highly regarded professional force with a storied history, worldwide renown and domestic following. The HKP has evolved from a nearly all-white colonial police establishment in 1842 to a mostly Hong Kong�XChinese police organ-isation in 2014.
On the eve of taking possession of Hong Kong by British forces in 1841, the British Foreign Secretary dismissively observed Hong Kong to be a ��barren island��.1 This statement registered British officials�� displeasure in taking Hong Kong after a costly war.2 It also reflected British public opinion of the times. The nation was tired of war and weary of burdensome colonial possessions. It is only later in Hong Kong��s history that the ��barren rock�� takes on a more upbeat note, along with her economic success: ��This barren rock legend, as one critic observed, has been reiterated in one way or the other by every British official implying that, since Britain created Hong Kong out of wilderness, it has contributed more to the development of Hong Kong than anyone else.��3
But Hong Kong before the British was fairly well settled by indigenous population with a vibrant external opium trade4 and thriving internal econ-omy: ��Do not decry Hong Kong too quickly. There are fine granite quarries worked by industrious stone masons who will benefit if we fortify the island. There is a thriving fishing village whose business will improve if we move in.��5 In fact, according to an India Company��s Select Committee charged with mapping out the safest passages up the China, it found Hong Kong to be an ideal place to conduct business: ��These observations lead us to con-clude that if England is to occupy any part of South China it should be Hong Kong. If it was a free port it will be the most considerable mart east of the Cape. The Portuguese got it wrong�Xthey accepted shallow water and exclu-sive rules. Hong Kong has deep water and should be a free port forever.��6 The people were also well regulated living in segregated communities.7
As to who lived in Hong Kong at the time, we find that
The inhabitants were of four Chinese races: The Punti or Cantonese, the Hoklos, the Hakkas or ��stranger families��, and the outcast called Tankas or ��egg people�� (perhaps because their boats had egg shaped canopies). They lived for the most part in segregated communities, speaking their own languages and generally behaving apathetically towards one another. The powerful land-owning families of the region, however were all Cantonese��s and they were grouped into the Five Great Clans, Tang, Hau, Pan, Liu and Man, each domi-nating its own villages and possessing its inherited lands in common.8
Before the British, Hong Kong was governed by a Chinese imperial dis-trict magistrate working out of Nam Tau, on the shores of Deep Bay to the northwest with a fortified headquarter in Kowloon City. The magistrate reported to the Viceroy of Guangdong with troops and warships under his command.9 For example, on 10 January 1839 Captain Ho Ko Chung, com-mander of the Chinese squadron at Kowloon Bay, Hong Kong, petitioned the Viceroy as follows:
A small foreign ship with an awning over her aft deck (a schooner�Xlikely one of the ferries banned from the river) is cruising off western Hong Kong between Apleichau and Green Island. I have sent boats to constantly observe her and prevent native fishermen, etc., from contacting with her.10
In the beginning, the British preferred ��indirect rule�� with a strategy that came to be known as ��dual track�� rule, with British ��steering�� and Chinese ��rowing��; that is, rule by proxy was the norm.11
The British crowd liked to extol the unique characteristics of British colonial rule, its beliefs in racial difference, its use of indigenous rulers and traditional institutions, and its creation of what (and some of their foreign emulators) believed was the most effective instrument of colonial power�Xthe system of indirect rule.12
The system worked well for the most part, with British and Chinese per-forming their respective roles in unison. To be expected, there were many differences between the British and Chinese in culture and habits, which gave rise to perennial low intensity conflicts, occasional vocal protestations, and, in rare instances violent confrontations.13 By the 1860s, the colonists preferred to integrate Chinese elites in the government structure and they were allowed to manage their own affairs (Nan Bei Hong) (1868) in providing for their own welfare at Tung Wah Hospital (1870, 1872) and partaking in policing and pro-tection of the Chinese community with the District Watch Force (1866).
In order to study the governance and policing of Hong Kong, we need to dispel three myths on Hong Kong before British rule: First, Hong Kong was a ��barren rock�� devoid of enterprising people and economic activities. Second, Hong Kong people were disorganised, uncivilised, disorderly and evil. Third, Hong Kong people enjoyed no government, administration or supervision before 1841.
This book is on the ��history and reform�� of (colonial) policing in Hong Kong. Specifically, it is about policing in Hong Kong during the colonial years, historically, before and after the Second World War. Its basic approach is to question accepted colonial history. Is HKP a colonial force in theory and practice before 1945? Has the HKP been transformed from a colonial police establishment into a modern policing agency, after 1945? In both instances the organisation and operations of HKP is at issue.
Thematically, this book is divided into two parts. In Part I, it argues that ��colonial policing�� in Hong Kong (as in elsewhere) takes on local colour and hue in practice: ��colonial policing with Hong Kong�XChinese characteristics.�� In Part II, the book observes that the HKP has gone through four distinc-tive reform periods, namely, the ��formation period�� (1845), ��reorganisation period�� (1872), the ��modernisation period�� (1950s) and finally the ��decoloni-sation period�� (1990s). It argues that HKP reform in the 1950s was the piv-otal point in transforming the HKP from a colonial force into a civil one, by way of localisation, legalisation, modernisation, communalisation and organisation.
This chapter provides some historical and theoretical background to this study, especially on how to re-conceptualise the relationship between colonial master and subjects with a ��more or less governmental control�� model.14 It first discusses the possession of Hong Kong by the British in ��Colonial Hong Kong�� (Section I) and development of policing in Hong Kong, from colonial to SAR policing (Section II: ��The Origin of Hong Kong Police��). This chapter then turns to explore and explicate one aspect of colonial policing in Hong Kong, that is, how to conceptualise top-down British colonial policing of Hong Kong vs. bottom-up Chinese policing in Hong Kong as a colony, in a more functional term (Sections III and IV). This chapter ends with an outline of each chapter (Section V).
I: Colonial Hong Kong
The story of Hong Kong Police (HKP) and colonial policing of Hong Kong started long before the British ever set foot in Hong Kong. It started with the then-prospering British Far East trade, requiring a place for foothold and shelter.
British interest in Far East trade and commerce began in the seven-teenth century with the establishment of the East India Company under Royal Charter: ��The Governor and Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies.�� Said Charter granted the East India Company a monopoly of all British trade east of Cape of Good Hope.15
In 1699, the East India Company set up its first British factory in China. Since then, and for the next two decades, Britain was in fierce competition with the France and the Dutch to monopolise trade in China.16 This resulted in chronic violence.17 In the end, the East India Company beat its rivals through monopolistic legal protection (British subjects could not work for competitors), sound trade practices (quality goods, favourable finances, reli-able contracts), guaranteed home market (for tea and silk), superior trading organisation (a regional trading system extending to India), quiet diplomacy, and at times, crude corruptive practices and dominating military presence.18 Trading in China thousands of miles away from home required logistic sup-port and safe ports as back up. As early as February 1789, an exploratory party was dispatched to Lantau to scout out a good harbor:
Secondly that the great extent of our commercial concerns in China requires a place of security as a depot for such of our goods as cannot be sold off or shipped during the short season that is allowed for our shipping to arrive and depart; and that for this purpose we wish to obtain a grant of a small tract of ground or detached Island, but in a more convenient situation than Canton, where our present warehouses are at a great distance from our ships, and where we are not able to restrain the irregularities which are occasion-ally committed by the Seamen of the Company��s ships, and those of private traders�K Or with as little trouble and with more advantage we might make a settlement in Lantao or Cow-hee (Ma Wan), and then Macao would of itself crumble to nothing in a short time.19
Until the Opium Wars (1842), the British merchants were not able to open up other Chinese trade ports, beyond Canton. Canton became the de facto British trade headquarters in China, with Macau as a wait station.20 Hong Kong, while not being the first or best choice of the British imperial government, by default became the leading free trade port the British had hoped for in the region after 1841. With its strategic location and unsur-passed seaport, it ended up being one of Britain��s most successful and pros-perous dependents ever, allowing the British to claim victory by spreading her civilisation and economy abroad.21
British possession of Hong Kong began in earnest with the signing of the Treaty of Chuenpi on 20 January 1841, without the blessing of the Crown of England or concession from the Emperor of China. On that day, Captain Elliot issued a circular from Macao claiming Hong Kong as a British Crown colony for the benefit of all merchants, traders and sailors, worldwide. A free trade port with no duties and little restrictions22 under British Administration in the heart of Asia (China) was born, and would remain under rule until 1997. The circular also made clear that the Chinese empire was welcome to levy import/export duties for goods outside Hong Kong -territorial waters and within the confine of Wall City in Kowloon as she deemed fit and proper.
During that time, Hong Kong played a similar role as Macao had been playing since 1557. There were some differences between the two, however. First, during the Ming Dynasty, China welcomed foreign traders. As a result, Macao played a less strategic role for China-bound traders. This meant that Macao functioned as a support station for wayward travellers more so than a protective shelter for restricted traders. Second, Macao was not a free port. The use of Macao had to be negotiated with the Portuguese. In 1627, the East India Company wanted to trade with China (Canton) via Macao, but the Portuguese refused due to trade competition. Finally, in 1634, Court of Directors of East India Company was able to negotiate a treaty for the use of Macao with the Governor of Portuguese.23
With the cessation of Hong Kong accomplished, Her Majesty Queen Victoria appointed Captain Elliot on 26 January 1841 as the Chief Superintendent of Trade of British Subjects in China.24 As such, Elliot was vested with the plenary power under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom on 29 January 1841 to execute the office of Her Majesty��s Commissioner, Procurator, and Plenipotentiary in China.25
On 29 January 1841, as the first act of government of Hong Kong, in his capacity as the Chief Superintendent of Trade of British Subjects in China, and effectively the governor of Hong Kong, Captain Elliot issued his first proclamation, declaring: First, subject to the pleasure of Her Majesty the Queen of England, the Government of Hong Kong, was in the Office of Chief Superintendent of Trade of British Subjects in China. Second, Hong Kong natives and Chinese nationals were to be governed by Chinese law and cus-toms, torture accepted. Third, all other persons in Hong Kong were subjected to British rule and Hong Kong laws.26
The aforementioned bifurcation of law and dual justice administration was introduced to accommodate two distinctively different kinds of people (Chinese and British) and cultures (East vs. West) as a stop gap measure, until such a time where the Chinese and British communities completely merged into one, that of Hong Kong.27
The dual legal system was also introduced for other philosophical, politi-cal and social reasons:
1. During the negotiation of the peace treaty, the British Government maintained that she was only interested in possession of Hong Kong as a trading post, not a British settlement.
2. Likewise the Chinese Government maintained that the right of pos-session of Hong Kong did not rise to the level of control over her people, that is, possession of land, not control of people.
3. Traditionally, Chinese ethnic identity and political nationality rights could not be divested, that is, ��born a Chinese person, die a Chinese ghost�� concept.28
4. It would be unjust to impose British law on the local residents and Chinese nationals. The Chinese did not know English, and more importantly were not used to and were not comfortable with British justice.
5. It would be impractical to enforce British law on the Chinese. British officials had limited facilities and experiences with Chinese custom, culture and language.
6. It would be unfair to impose British law on the Chinese people when foreign powers, including the British, have insisted on dual legal and justice administration for foreign nations in China��s trade ports in the form of extra-territoriality. Arguably, this was the first formula-tion of the ��one country two principle�� doctrine.29
The first Hong Kong Government administration was formed in 27.February 1842 with the removal of the Superintendent of Trade office from Macao to Hong Kong. The organisation and staff of this department included: Mr. A. R. Johnson, Deputy Superintendent; E. Elmslie, Secretary of Treasury; J.R. Morrison, Chinese Secretary and Interpreter; L. d�� Almada e Castro, A. W. Elmslie, and J.M. d��Almada e Castro, Clerks; Rev. Ch. Glitzlaff and R. Thom (Joint Interpreters), J.B. Redriguez, W. H. Medhurst, and Kazigachi Kiukitchi, Clerks.
The clearest signal yet of the Hong Kong Government intending to stay permanently came from 22 March 1842 ��Notification of Sir H. Pottinger�� appearing in Hong Kong��s first local newspapers: the Friend of China and Hong Kong Gazette to the effect that a Land Committee was established to investigate claims, to mark off boundaries, to fix the direction and breadth of the roads, to order the removal of encroachments, and to assign new locations of Chinese and European dwellings.30 Pottinger followed this ��Notification�� with more domestication actions. Through enforcing monetary policy, establishing a post office, and precluding native Chinese from owning prime property, he stabilised the currency, created a communication facility and enforced land administration.31
The Hong Kong Government also showed a commitment to stay in Hong Kong for the long haul by making substantial infrastructural invest-ment, including purchasing of Commissariat Building, and the building of roads, barracks,32 hospitals, naval facilities and stores.33 While the British Government had decided to stay, most the people of Hong Kong were sojourns treating Hong Kong as a wait station, on borrowed time in a bor-rowed place.34
The first order of business of the new Hong Kong colonial government, indeed any government to a new land, was to attend to order within and security without. But what kind of policing was envisioned for Hong Kong? Specifically, how was colonial policing performed in Hong Kong? To this subject we now turn.
II: The Origin of Hong Kong Police
Law and Order 1839�V1844
How Hong Kong was controlled, governed and policed depended on British imperial mindset, local conditions and relationship with China; most press-ing at the time�Xstate of war, and later as evolved�Xhaven for refugees. Well into the 1900s, Hong Kong was the Casablanca of the East, where personal loyalty mattered more so than obedience to law, and situational expediency dictated more so than moral principles.
In 1839, five years before the British colonists landed in Hong Kong on 25.January 1841, the East India Company��s Select Committee has commis-sioned a study to discover safe passages in the South China Sea for trading with China. The survey was conceived and done without disturbing the rela-tionship with the imperial officials at home who had few interests and little knowledge of the Orient. At that time, there was no intent to exploit Hong Kong as an opium centre, still less thinking about how to manage Hong Kong or administer Chinese indigenous residents. Hong Kong was sought only as a port of convenience, namely as a transit point and resupply centre, not as a permanent settlement. As the editor of Canton Register,35 a mouth piece of British commercial interests in China, attested in 1839:
The survey of the estuary was called by the India Company��s Select Committee to discover the safest passages up the China Sea. It was not then intended to promote an extensive smuggling trade outside the river so not every bay was examined. Indeed a close inspection of the coast would have unsettled the local officials whom the Company was at pains to keep friendly�KNow the situation has changed but what does England want with Hong Kong and its wretched village of poor fishermen (Chek Chu, later called Stanley). If ��A Passenger�� is suggesting we possess the islet and oust its inhabitants that would be a thievish, cunning and cowardly deed, unbecoming to our country.36
The above editorial was written in response to ��A Passenger�� letter to the Canton Register on 3 May 1839 reporting on its survey finding of Hong Kong earlier. A careful reading of the letter makes clear that ��A Passenger�� (possibly working for the Company) was only concerned about the stra-tegic location (within reach of Canton) and the natural attributes (ease of access, water hole, protected and deep harbors) of Hong Kong as a free trade port, as compared to other ports in the area (South China), such as Macau:
I recently made a survey of the Pearl River Estuary. We started at Kap Shui Mun (the passage between Ma Wan and Lantau Islands) at the end of which was a perfect harbour. We then went to Lamma which had looked good but turned out to be unprotected from the weather�Xthe best bay (Sok Kwu Wan) was too landlocked. We found a small but good harbour at the waterfall on Hong Kong opposite Lamma (Waterfall Bay, Pokfulam). This had good depth by two entrances. We then looked at Lyemun and, of all the harbours in this vicinity, this is the best. The entrance from Tai Tam is as safe as the Bogue and gives access to deep water passages both north and south of Lintin. Kowloon Bay is an excellent anchorage of 5-7 fathoms over a clay bottom, plenty of fresh water ashore and easy approaches east and west�KThese observations lead us to conclude that if England is to occupy any part of South China it should be Hong Kong. If it was a free port it will be the most considerable mart east of the Cape. The Portuguese got it wrong�Xthey accepted shallow water and exclusive rules. Hong Kong has deep water and should be a free port for ever.37
During this time, Hong Kong and surrounding water was patrolled by the Chinese war junks against Chinese privates, smugglers and opium trad-ers. The imperial officers were also tasked by an emperors�� edict to prevent foreigners from buying provisions, causing mischiefs, committing crime and dealing with opium in Hong Kong. The law and order situation in Hong Kong deteriorated precipitously with the onslaught of rootless migrants from China, ill-disciplined soldiers from Britain, drunken sailors from many countries, and in huge numbers:
A census of Queen��s Town (the informally adopted name of the foreign settle-ment on Hong Kong Island) revealed the native population is primarily made-up of carpenters, bricklayers & masons (3000 of them) who are involved in the construction of our homes and warehouses. Apart from them we have 600 hawkers, 500 chandlers, 440 prostitutes, 300 unemployed people, 130 opium sellers and some others in food retail, services and the like to a total of 8200 residents. �KThe major village of Hong Kong at Chek Chu is believed to contain about 3000 people. There are a few hundred in each of the villages of Wong Nai Chung, Little Hong Kong, Shek Pai Wan and some other smaller hamlets mak-ing a total of over 12,000.38
On 24.August 1841, Elliot and Bremer visited Hong Kong from Macau. They were knocked down by the villagers and Bremer was stripped of all his possessions. As luck would have it, an ex-comprador came to the rescue and saved the day.39
On 2.June 1842, it was reported that ��3 privates of the 49th regiment have been caught robbing a Chinese family in Hong Kong. Many Chinese inhabitants report there have been numerous similar events before but as the criminals are soldiers they have kept quiet.��40
Origin of the HKP
On 30.April 1841, British Plenipotentiary Charles Elliot appointed Captain William Caine of the 26th Infantry Regiment as Chief Police Magistrate to maintain law and order in Hong Kong.41 Cain was charged with organis-ing an orderly social life in the Colony ��according to the laws, customs and usages of China, as nearly as may be (every description of torture accepted) or the preservation of peace, and the protection of life and property, over all the inhabitants of the said Island,��42 that is, in charge of land policing. Cain was given a herculean task, with little guidance and near carte blanche authority. The only limitation perhaps is that he could not impose impris-onment of over three months, fines of over $400 or corporal punishment of 100 lashes. William Pedder, Lieutenant of the Royal Navy, had the authority and responsibility of water policing, i.e., to secure peace, law and order in the harbor.43
Cain was in charge of the well-being of 7500 people; 4350 being in 20 odd villages, mostly fishermen. Of these, 2000 people were living on boats, 800 people were at the bazaar providing food and services to foreigners and 350 labourers were plying for hire. At that time, there were few houses, per-manent residents, and very little commercial activities in Victoria, the capital town of Hong Kong. All this changed with the arrival of the British. By June 1842, Victoria was enlivened with construction and commercial activities of all kinds, with soldiers, traders, labourers of all colour and persuasion con-verging in Hong Kong, mostly Victoria. The population of Hong Kong grew exponentially. Policing in Hong Kong during this unsettled period was about maintaining order in Victoria and providing for security in the Hong Kong harbour.
The law and order situation Cain was confronted with is best retold by a contemporary account of a British traveller to Hong Kong at the time:
The native population in Victoria, consists of shopkeepers, tradesmen, ser-vants, boat-people, and coolies, and altogether form a most motley group. Unfortunately there is no inducement for the respectable Chinese merchant to take up his quarters there, and until that takes place, we shall always have the worst set of people in the country. The town swarms with thieves and rob-bers, who are only kept under by the strong armed police lately established. Previous to this, scarcely a dark night passed without some one having his house broken into by an armed band, and all that was valuable being carried off or destroyed. The audacious rascals did not except the Governor even, for one night Government House was robbed; and another time they actually stole the arms of the sentries. These armed bands, sometimes a hundred strong, dis-appeared, as they came, in a most marvelous manner, and no one seemed to know whence they came or whither they went. Such attacks are fortunately now of rare occurrence. In all my wanderings on the island, and also on the mainland hereabouts, I found the inhabitants harmless and civil. I have visited their glens and their mountains, their villages and small towns, and from all the intercourse I have had with them, I am bound to give them this character.44
Report of crime in local papers was a daily routine from burglaries, to robberies, to theft, to piracy:
Burglaries: On 9.June 1842, the Friend of China reported:
Hong Kong burglaries: Mr Pybus�� godown, Captain Duus�� godown, Mr Kinsley��s godown, the French consul��s godown, the Victoria Hotel, and the naval commissariat stores have all been burgled by gangs from Kowloon who come across the harbour in boats at night. They scratch out the mortar and remove bricks from the walls to gain entry. This might happen less if our municipal police force had not been summarily disbanded.45
On 16.June 1842, the Friend of China reported:
Hong Kong burglaries: Mr Almack��s China house, Townsend and Co��s godown, D. Wilson and Co (of Calcutta)��s premises have all been burgled this week. Some stolen property was found at the waterside which suggests it might be the same Kowloon gang as last week. There are reports of similar burglaries in Macau as well. Carpenters living at and employed on buildings near Townsend and Co��s godown knew of that crime but kept quiet as they said they themselves would have been attacked if they raised the alarm. One thief was caught and sentenced to 60 strokes of the bamboo (the revised pun-ishment instead of the lash). Fortunately the attacks are only on property and not on the person. A few weeks ago the burglars forced open the treasury of ��an eminent firm�� in Macau and stole silver but the firm is keeping it quiet.46
Theft: On 23.June 1842, the Friend of China reported:
Crime report: Two thieves were caught stealing a cow worth $10 from Pokfulam village on Hong Kong Island. They were sentenced to caning and their queues were cut off�K. John Northgate, a sailor of HMS Druid, bought two bottles of Sam Shoo from Ah Tuk for a rupee. At that time he had $8 in his pocket as well. He then got drunk and when he regained consciousness his pocket was empty. A friend, who was less drunk, swore he saw the theft committed by Ah Tuk. Ah Tuk got 4 months goal with hard labour and was ordered to remain in prison until he repaid the $8.47
Robberies: On 28.June 1842, the Canton Register reported:
Robberies continue unabated at Hong Kong. Gangs sail across from Kowloon at night and burgle at will. More or less everyone has been affected. From Macau we hear it is the same group that robbed all the foreigners there, one by one, recently.48
Piracy: On 21.July 1842 Friend of China reported:
Hong Kong crime report. Tuk Kwai has been charged with piracy: Ah Chu says he was sailing his laden boat to Hong Kong and at Kap Shui Mun (north of Lantau) was attacked by pirates. He made no resistance and he was dropped on shore and the boat and cargo was sailed away by the pirates. He now accuses Tuk Kwai of being one of the pirates and proves his evidence is true by cutting off a cock��s head.49
To build a police force, Cain needed money and support. On May 1841, the Rate Ordinance was passed to fund the police.50 Captain Cain established a rudimentary police unit with 32 Indian and British military officers, all of them misfits with dubious characters. The pay was low. The working conditions were poor. The climate was demanding. The job was dangerous. The discipline was slacked. The turnover was rapid. All said, Hong Kong was a hazardous duty station for most Europeans. Friend of China reported in 1843:
Almost all who can leave this island have since departed. The best medical minds have ascribed the cause of sickness not to the climate or some other environmental factor but to the absence of suitable housing for Europeans liv-ing in the tropical climate of Hong Kong�K.What with the insecurity of life and property due to robberies and piracy, this present epidemic of sickness, the low tariff in China and particularly the attack on our ��free port�� status over opium, it is not surprising that some of the earliest colonists have now departed.51
Cain��s police contingent worked out of Central HQ and two distant out-posts at Aberdeen and Stanley. None of the officers there spoke the language, much less knew or cared about local culture. Policing then had more to do with pacification of a foreign land and controlling an alien people�Xsup-pressing piracy, controlling locals, fighting crime, and imposing order�Xrather than civil policing. ��In those years the most pressing problem was the creation of an ordered society in which law should be respected by a largely lawless vagabond population, both European and Chinese�K (with the)�K lack of an efficient force.��52
Judging by crime rates, public opinion and self-help initiatives, the police were not effective, and may have even been counterproductive. And, to most of the local residents and more than a few foreigners, the police were more trouble than they were worth, being corrupt, abusive and protective of vices and illegals. Without recourse to any meaningful control of police character, conduct and performance (which would be made possible by better recruitment, training, supervision and accountability), the colonial administration was left adopting draconian countermeasures, from stiff military discipline to mass dismissals. On 31.May 1842, the Canton Register Editorial reported:
The unprofessional conduct of the police at Hong Kong has caused Pottinger to discharge the entire force and replace it with soldiers. These men have also proved inadequate to the task and robberies are out of control. Hong Kong still lacks its own legislature and is fundamentally a garrison town.53
Three years after British took possession of Hong Kong, and in spite of the gallant effort of Cain, law and order in the colony had not improved, and to some has deteriorated, as evident by this Letter to the Editor of Friend of China on 3.August 1843:
Robbery is a serious problem. Some say the population is divided into two classes�Xthose who have been robbed and those who are about to be robbed. As soon as the moon is in its 1st or 3rd quarters the robberies commence in spite of 44 JP��s and 28 constables. The constables are insufficient and the mag-istrates have mostly already been robbed. How can they look after the thieves when they cannot look after themselves? Pottinger has been robbed, Caine has been robbed, the assistant magistrate (Hillier) has been robbed. Mr Bruce has been robbed. Mr Farncomb has been robbed. I don��t have enough paper to list them all. Sgd Old Stager.54
On 21.May 1844 the first Police Force Ordinance was passed (Ordinance No. 12). Captain Charles May (1844�V1862) started to organise the HKP along British lines. Funding was limited. The governor dropped his plan to staff the HKP with Chinese officers. On instruction from Sir Henry Pottinger, Lieutenant Colonel J.S. Malcolm provided the following overall assessment and strategic plan for organising the first HKP force:55
Previous to my leaving China, I received instructions from Sir Henry Pottinger, to lay before your Lordship, the necessity of some arrangement being made for the establishment of an effective Police, in the Colony of Hong Kong. At present that duty is carried on, by Soldiers, chosen from the Regiments quar-tered in the Island, but Sir Henry only looked on this, as a temporary arrange-ment, and considered that the best plan would be to raise a body of men in England, expressly for this service, the expense of which would be met, in part, by a rate levied on the residents on the Island. As however he was not aware of either the expense, or practicability of this plan, he left it to me to explain to your Lordship the circumstances of the case and the necessity of some persons being sent from England, owing to the impossibility of trusting entirely to Chinese Policemen and the great difficulty of obtaining Europeans for that duty. Since the personal communication I had with your Lordship on this subject, I have made every enquiry as to the expense of carrying out Sir Henry��s wishes and find, that to send out and maintain a force of 50 men and four Inspectors would cost at least six thousand pounds a year. From a rough calculation I have made I do not think that at present more than �G3000 a year could be raised by a rate of a shilling in the pound on the houses now built on the Island, but this of course would increase yearly, without any correspond-ing necessity for increase in the Police force.
It was then agreed between the Hong Kong Governor and the British White Hall that Commissioner of London Metropolitan Police would dis-patch three officers to lead the construction of the HKP, namely, Inspector Charles May and Sergeants Thomas Smithers and Hugh McGregor. They arrived on the 15th of March 1845, and were duly advanced to the ranks of superintendent and inspector.56
The first HKP had three London Metropolitan officers and 168 men (71 Europeans, 46 Indians, 51 Chinese).57 The Chinese officers were not trusted. They were relegated to playing mostly insignificant roles and supportive duties, for example, guarding and translating.
In 1867, Walter Meredith Deane (1867�V1892), a Cadet Officer who spoke fluent Chinese (Cantonese), was appointed Captain Superintendent of the HKP. The longest serving HKP head, he led the first HKP reform with a Commission of Inquiry. He also started the first policing training establish-ment�Xa language school. Notwithstanding his fluency with the Chinese lan-guage and familiarity with Hong Kong culture, he managed to stir up a first of its kind anti-imperialist protest in Hong Kong with the removal of 500 to 895 rickshaws from the streets of Hong Kong, out of concern for traffic control (Government Gazette, Nov. 2, 1883: 843). In this, Captain Deane was more responsive to foreign public opinion in high places than the solicita-tions of local pullers�� grievances in the street58:
Is there a ��rule of the road�� for jinrickshas or is there not? If there is�Xas I understand to be the case�Xwhat means, if any, age taken to enforce its observance? I may safely answer�Xjudging by results�Xno means whatever beyond perhaps the immediate neigh hood of [Hongkong] Club, and even this is very doubtful. There is practical chaos as regards any knowledge or observance of ��the rule of the road,�� and jinrickshas run on the left or right side of the road just as their inclination prompts and drawers. The result is, confusion worse confounded, collisions and general loss of temper, and abominably bad language all around (Hong Kong Daily Press, November 10, 1883).
In October 1943, interim Commissioner John Pennefather-Evans (1940�V1941, 1945) penned the ��Interim Report on the Hong Kong Police.�� In it he called for the complete reorganisation of the HKP, following the example of the Water Police, making it a more integrated and egalitarian work force, with the enlistment of ��more educated type of Chinese�� serving alongside with ��a few Eurasian lads of good standing.��
The European contingent who monopolized the rank of inspector should be phased out, in the meantime they should be given more strenuous instruction in the Cantonese language, and in general ��every effort should be made to enlarge the outlook and contacts of European members of the Force��.59
This marked the beginning of an era of localisation for the HKP.60 It would take many false starts and another 54 years to eventually complete the project in 1997.
Over time, with the arduous process of building and rebuilding, the HKP was able to transform itself in philosophy, mission, role, organisation, and style: from an instrument of political control to an agency of public order maintenance, from functioning as crime fighters to taking up the role of social services, from being organised as a para-military unit to being run as civil establishment, from authoritarian command and control to consulta-tive management, from corrupt to clean culture, and from abusive to profes-sional conduct.
Over the years, the HKP have been called many ��colorful�� names: ��licensed thugs�� (before 1970s) by the locals, ��yellow running dog�� or ��white skin pig�� by the rioters (1967 riots), ��Royal Hong Kong Police�� (since 1968) by the British Royals, ��Asia��s Finest�� by the world (after 1968), and ��shrink-ing neck tortoise�� by post-eighties generation. Each of the iconic names tells us something about the image of the HKP in the eyes of the public, as they served as cultural markers in the HKP��s growth from one era to another.
The proudest achievement yet of the HKP perhaps is that it is the only colonial police force in the world that has been decolonised successfully and re-invented itself seamlessly, in better form and style; out shining its colo-nial mentor, the London Metropolitan Police and admiringly copied by its administrative master, the Chinese Ministry of Public Security:61
With statistics showing unusually high rates of assent for characterizations of the current police as honorable, hardworking, and dedicated to the public, the Hong Kong Police are known worldwide as a historical and theoretical impossibility that effected massive growth with the full support of the public. Moreover, such peculiar and unique success of the Hong Kong Police con-firms that long-standing history of hybridity and exceptional ability by illus-trating how the police��s ascendancy was predicated on shift from a colonial to a local to a colonial-as-local identity.62
To earn its keep, the HKP had to face up to continuous challenges and crises: In the early colonial years, the HKP fought against lawlessness in Hong Kong, disorderly migrants from Kowloon, prevalence of privacy in the Pearl estuary and hapless drifters and unruly sojourns from everywhere in the early colonial years (1841). In 1958, it met the challenge of settling cor-ruption charges in high places by Attorney General Antsey in 195863 (The Caldwell Inquiry).64 Or consider its competition for control of the Chinese with the District Watch Force in the 1870s. More instances range from its dealing with police abuses and corruption in the 1890s, to containing the bubonic plague in 1891, to battling rickshaw anti-imperial protests in 1893, to doing running battle with Canton�XHong Kong strikers in 1925, to stamp-ing out gun running in 1926�V1927, to rebuilding of the HKP in the 1940s, to controlling of Chinese refugee in 1950s, to quelling of riots in 1859 and 1967, to purging of corruption in 1970s, to weathering pre-1997 transition pains in 1980s, to the reinventing of the HKP in 1990s and finally to the discovery of politics in policing in 2000 and beyond.
After 34 years of service and on the eve of his retirement, Hong Kong Island Regional Commander, ACP Eric Leung Chi-bun has this parting comment on the latest chapter of HKP continuity and change, that is, trans-formation of law enforcement environment in Hong Kong from imposing (colonial) to negotiated order (democratic):65
As an officer, we must always be politically neutral, but we should not be polit-ically ignorant. Knowing what is happening in society and understanding the cause and effect of every incident is the key to an effective and fruitful negotia-tion with the public. It is so important when handling public processions and demonstrations.66
Transition from Colonial to Administrative Policing
Hong Kong is divided into three parts: Hong Kong Island, Kowloon Peninsula and the New Territories. The island of Hong Kong and peninsular of Kowloon were acquired by the British Crown in perpetuity from the Chinese Government by treaties (Treaty of Nanking, 29.August 1842 and Convention of Peking, October, 1860) after the Opium War. The New Territories were leased to the Crown for a term of 99 years by a second Convention of Peking entered on 9.June 1898. The term expired in 1997.67
In 1979, the soon-to-expire New Territories lease term caused uncertain-ties to Hong Kong trade and investment.
The deadline for Sir Murray was not 1997 but sometime in the mid-1980s because of a practical issue: all individual land leases in the New Territories expired in June 1997. And since mortgages tended to be for 15 years, from 1982 on those mortgages would get shorter and shorter and there would be an inevitable impact on investment and on confidence in general.68
This precipitated an extended negotiation between the two governments (Governor Maclehose in 1979; Prime Minister Thatcher and Deng Xiaoping in 1982) on the future sovereignty and governance of Hong Kong. The British wanted to maintain the status quo; failing that to trade sovereignty for administration rights to Hong Kong. China wanted nothing short of reunit-ing with Hong Kong. China prevailed.
The Government of the People��s Republic of China declares that to recover the Hong Kong area (including Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and the New Territories, hereinafter referred to as Hong Kong) is the common aspiration of the entire Chinese people, and that it has decided to resume the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong with effect from 1 July 1997.69
On 27.May 1985, the British and Chinese governments signed a Joint Declaration providing for the return of Hong Kong sovereignty to China on 1.July 1997, as a Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). Under the Declaration, the HKSAR would be self-governing and enjoy a ��high degree of autonomy�� under the ��one country two system�� concept, with Hong Kong��s prevailing lifestyle and all major institutions unchanged for a period of 50 years.70
In 1997, Hong Kong was decolonised, with sovereignty reverted to China. The HKP weathered the transition with determination and poise, keeping HK secure and safe, contrary to the expectations of pundits and admirers.71 Since then, the HKP has secured the confidence of a vast majority of Hong Kong people and earned the praise of many foreign observers for its quiet efficiency and sure-footed effectiveness in enforcing law,72 fighting crime, maintaining order, controlling crowds73 and performing internal security functions. For all that it has achieved, administratively and operationally, it is known around the world as the ��Asian��s Finest��.
III: Police and Policing
In this study, ��police�� is referenced as an institution of political control in organisational form.
Conceptually, ��policing�� approximates Foucault��s idea of ��governability��.74 It refers to the totality of what government75 does in achieving control through discipline of self.76 In practice and everyday life, ��policing�� is the actualisa-tion of ��government social control��,77 formally or informally, structurally or situationally, directly or indirectly, coercively or persuasively, physically and mentally. The ultimate objective of ��policing�� is to achieve predictability78 of conduct or conformity with government norms. The former is a ��governmen-tality��79 project which Freud envisioned as ��governance rationality��80 and the later a ��government�� project which Austin called ��habit of obedience�� to law enterprise.81
Historically speaking, long before there is a specialised, bureaucratised and legalised police agency by the state, there are policing functions per-formed by the people.82
In pre-state kinship society, there is no organised, specialised and institu-tionalised police. Policing as a social control function is diffused throughout the community. It is being performed by everyone, some more so than oth-ers. It is naturally conceived, historically developed, traditionally assigned and culturally enacted role sets, for example, parents over kids or teachers over students. In practice, policing is informal in nature and ubiquitous in kind. It is integrated with and embedded into everyday life. It is manifested as disapproval here and gossip there. Ostracism and expulsion, or social death, are the most serious sanctions.
Norm violations are treated as a denial of expectations�Xa challenge to good order and discipline�Xto be managed, not punished, with the deploy-ment of applicable resources.83 As such disorderly conducts are considered as inter-personal disputes, corresponding to one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-many disputations. In face-to-face, intimate society, disputes between people signal violation of trust and breach of relationship. Dispute resolution requires mutually agreed upon settlement arrived at through negotiation, restitution and reintegration (what we now called reintegration shame process). The capacity to manage expectations and settle disputes by the group internally is called ��collective efficacy��.84 When no mutuality of relationship between people exists, dispute settlement is not possible, and violence ensues.
With the emergence of a state comes a class-based and economically- determined formal social control system that is institutionalised, organised, specialised, bureaucratised and legalised, to be enforced by coercive agents sanctioned by the state, such as parents at home, teacher in school and police in the street.85
Policing in the old days and before the ��new police�� is the internal admin-istration of a state or states such that people are secured, have enough to eat and a healthy environment to live. In the past, people were policed (reg-ulated) by various agencies, from tax authorities to health departments to educational organisation. In time, police have taken on more specialised functions, that of maintaining law and order.
With the discovery of the state, ��state police�� and ��people��s policing�� co-existed uncomfortably, with the state police performing formal law enforcement (by physical force) and people��s policing conducting social control (with moral persuasion or social pressure).86 The theory and prac-tice of ��dual track�� policing appeared. In imperial China ��state�� policing was conducted by the magistrate with the help of the local intelligentsia87 and ��people�� policing was performed with family control and clan rule, -supported by the state.88
With the advent of late stage class-based capitalistic society, the ascen-sion of state coercive control in the form of centralised and organised police, for example, London Metropolitan Police Act 1829 has come at the expense of communal social control in the hands of dispersed and natural policing agents such as village heads.
Philosophically89 and theoretically,90 the relationship between formal state ��policing�� and informal people ��policing�� is a competitive and contentious, not corroborative and harmonious, one, with both speaking the language of mutuality and each hiding the intent of exclusivity.91 Communist police doc-trine92 and colonial policing paradigm93 have made the dominance of state policing over people��s policing explicit, unimpeachable and non-negotiable.
In the context of colonial Hong Kong, the challenge was in fusing of state�Xcolonial policing with indigenous policing, disguised as a rule of law vs. sanction by custom project.94 The solution is ��dual track�� justice. ��Dual track�� justice conjures up image of two systems of control. This runs counter to Karl Marx��s police as instrumentality of state theory95 or Max Weber��s sovereignty as monopoly of coercive power thesis.96 ��A theory of more or less government control�� seeks to integrate state�Xcolonial rule vs. people�Xindigenous control.
IV: Integrating State vs. People Policing
A Theory of More or Less Government Control
The ��theory of more or less governmental control��97 provides a framework to delineate and elucidate the relative relationship and respective role between state and people policing. The theory postulates that in any society there can only be one duly constituted governmental authority with right to use force to control the people.98 The theory also postulates that such right to control with force can be delegated, making such delegated social control agents, one or more, an integral part of ��governmental social control��, in more or less way.
The theory explains under what circumstances and contingent on what conditions would a private social control agent become a state polic-ing authority. Under this theory, ��dual track�� justice (here policing) does not mean two separate and distinct control systems, working at cross purpose with each other, as is commonly assumed. ��Dual track�� justice really means two complementary control systems serving one political master, that is, the political sovereign,99 otherwise known as collaborative policing.
The difference between pure colonial policing and hybrid colonial�Xcollab-orative policing is that the former speaks to the dominating aspect of theoretical colonial rule and the later reveals the mutuality of colonial policing in real term.
The Myth of Unitary Government
People have long associated state and government with omnipotent, omni-present, undivided, perpetual and absolute political control over an area (country) or people (association) or conditions (status).100 This image of gov-ernment is so entrenched that it is deemed self-evident and uncontroversial, such that even now, when we speak of government, we immediately iden-tify any government, as ��the government�� (much like ��the nature��)�Xa super-organic body with a life force of its own.
Deconstructing the Myth of Unitary Government
Conceptually, the recognition of the political reality of fungible government authority (more or less) and divisible government jurisdiction (bigger or smaller) is necessary to ply open the conceptual black box of unitary govern-mental social control.101 The debunking of the myth of government makes way for the proper construction of a sociological definition of law enforce-ment which recognises the relativity of governmental social control, that is, more or less governmental social control with multiplex law.
The deconstruction of the myth of government as a holistic and inte-grated unit can be achieved in two ways: internal deconstruction and exter-nal deconstruction.
Internal deconstruction. There is substantial division of labour within the government, particularly when government services are bureaucratised (Weber), horizontally and vertically. Thus, while the political sovereign makes policies at the top, it is up to the professional administrators to carry them out at the bottom. For example, a zero tolerance drug policy from the President of the United States has to be executed by the Department of Justice and implemented by the FBI. This is a vertical division of political vs. admin-istrative labour, policy making vs. policy execution role. Even in medieval Europe, the sovereign in the body of the King could not be everywhere at the same time; there was substantial delegations of governing powers and responsibility to appointed officials, for example feudalism. The political sov-ereign then as now could also expand his span of control or fine tune his administration by creating coordinated horizontal specialised departments, for example establishing judicial vs. legislative, vs. executive branches of gov-ernment. This is a horizontal division of labour.
External deconstruction. There may be competing sovereign powers (legal pluralism) in a state, each commanding the loyalty, allegiance, and obedience of a group of the citizen of the state in a point of time and over a geographic bot-tom. For example, a citizen of the United States is subjected to multiple juris-dictions at any point in time: county, state and federal law applies, depending on the time, place, matters, issues involved and a citizen of imperial China is subjected to overlapping social control as a son to his parents, as a member to his family, and as an associate to his professional guile.
The idea of relative government is not new in theory or practice, nor is the functional distribution of government powers to private parties a recent invention. Sovereign governments since antiquity have been willing to part with some or all of their powers to others (private parties included) to facili-tate domestic rule, further their own interests or allow for foreign conquests. Let us now turn to examine the theoretical construct of relative�Xmore or less�Xgovernmental social control.
The Theory of Relative Government or Governance
The idea of more or less governmental social control can be adequately cap-tured by two concepts, that is, delegation of government social control rights to non-state parties (alternatively private or civil society) and government sponsorship of non-state social control measures.
More or Less Government by Delegation of Social Control Rights
More or less government in social control can result from the affirmative del-egation of social control rights and responsibilities. Delegation of social control rights (and responsibilities)102 is a re-redistribution of constitutional rights.103 They are rights conferred upon or acknowledged to exist in a private party by the state to take part in governmental social control, for example family disci-pline or clan rule in traditional China, sheriff deputies in the wild West, and private policing in modern America.104 Depending on the scope of delegated control, extent of delegated authority and degree of supervision over delegation, that is social control responsibilities (jurisdiction), powers, and accountabil-ity, the delegated party acts more or less like an autonomous government. The broader the delegation�Xmore responsibilities, bigger power and lesser account-ability�Xthe more a private party behaves like an autonomous government. The more restricted the responsibilities, the lesser the powers, and the closer the supervision, the less a private party behaves like an autonomous government.
Social control authority is of three kinds. In decreasing order of authority, they are authority to define social norms, authority to estab-lish social norms and authority to enforce social norms; corresponding to our Western notions of legal policy setting, law making and law execution (which encompasses in broad terms law enforcement, prosecution, adjudi-cation and punishment).
More rights of social control means more power sharing with the domi-nant political authority and in turn power domination over subordinate social subjects. Power sharing is manifested in negotiation for control as give and take. Lesser power allows for negotiation over outcome. More power allows for negotiation over substantive law. Power parity allows for negotiation over procedure law. Power domination (from more to less) is manifested in the imposition of decision making norms, process rules as well as results.105
More or Less Government through Sponsorship of Private Social Control?106
More or less government in social control due to state sponsorship of private social control activities is state participation in private social control. State sponsorship means state countenance, approval, endorsement, promotion, sanction and/or enforcement.
State sponsorship can be in the form of passive endorsement or active involvement corresponding to the two extremes of sponsorship, that is, from minimal endorsement to maximum involvement.
Passive endorsement includes countenance, approval or endorsement. Countenance is implied acceptance. It is demonstrated by knowledge of private social control and failure to act. Approval is expressed acceptance. It is demonstrated by formal acknowledgment of private social control. Endorsement is positive acceptance. It is acceptance plus quality assurance. It is demonstrated by certification or recommendation.
Active involvement includes promotion, sanction or enforcement. Promotion is active development. It is a step taken to facilitate the establish-ment, maintenance, growth, expansion and improvement of social control, including enabling legislation but short of making available legal sanctions for private control enforcement. It is measured by efforts contributing to devel-opment, for example making available material resources or lending needed advices. Sanctions are making available legal punishment for private social control. Enforcement is directly participating in social control activities through the exercise of state social control powers and institutional authorities.
State sponsorship can attach to various aspects of the control activities: origination, conceptualisation, construction, organisation, implementation, supervision, monitoring and control.
Discussion
According to the above-proposed ��more or less government�� social con-trol model, we can now begin to explicate and delineate how indigenous Chinese can exercise government social control powers, by delegation and with sponsorship from the British, over the Chinese people in the colony. In this way we can say, indigenous self-policing is an integral part and exten-sion of colonial policing, with colonial police being more engaged in con-trol policy and indigenous policing more involved with control operations. This makes the colonial policing vs. indigenous policing relationship more functionally distributed than heirarchically organised; that is, British colo-nial police holds the balance of control power (high policing) and indig-enous social control agents part taking in peripheral control functions (low policing).107
V: Book Organisation
Overview
This is about ��Policing in Hong Kong: History and Reform��. Thematically, it is divided into two separate but mutually reinforcing parts, i.e., colonial polic-ing (Chapters 1 to 4) and HKP reform (Chapters 5 to 9).
Chapter Outlines
��Introduction�� states the focus of the study and briefly discusses the law and order situation in 1840s and origin of the HKP before proposing a frame-work to analyse and explicate the relationship between state police (top down) vs. people��s policing (bottom up). It argues that in the end, policing in Hong Kong, before and after 1997, can best be understood as a (re)distribu-tion of government powers and functions, along more or less government control lines. In doing so, it allows us, for the first time, to look at colonial vs. decolonised policing not as two distinct and discrete adversarial concept, institutional form and organisational practice, in opposite extremes, but as fungible and changeable practices, each accommodating the other as in the case of colonial Hong Kong, befitting the political, social and cultural cir-cumstances of the day (1840s vs. 1950s vs. 1970s), or during critical moments of the time (1957, 1961 riots).
Chapter 1 ��The Studying of Policing in Hong Kong�� provides an overview of the development of police studies in Hong Kong, as an emerging field, since the 1990s. The chapter variously describes the state of the field and its key data sources, methodology and literature, before attending to its prob-lems and prospect. This chapter is organised into four sections. First, ��Police Study in Hong Kong: A Brief History�� traces the development of studying policing in Hong Kong. Second, it reviews some noteworthy Hong Kong police research and publications (Section II). Third, it discusses some of the difficulties, problems and issues in conducting research on policing in Hong Kong and into the HKP (Section III). The main problems are a lack of schol-arly interest, data and capacity. Section IV is a ��Conclusion�� to the chapter.
Chapter 2 is on ��Debating Colonial Policing��. The chapter defines as it deconstructs the ��colonial policing�� as a construct and practice, first analyti-cally than empirically. It observes that long before its demise in 1997, colo-nial policing in Hong Kong was not what it is made out to be; it has its own existential characteristics and behaviour. This chapter has four sections. Section I defines as it discusses the ��Concept of Colonial Policing�� before raising the issue, stating the premises and defending the thesis that conven-tional idea of colonial policing ill fits grounded observation of policing in colonial Hong Kong. Section II ��Deconstructing Colonial Policing�� problem-atises colonial policing as applied to Hong Kong. It adopts four premises in unpacking colonial policing in Hong Kong, that is, colonial policing takes many forms; colonial policing is a pluralistic enterprise; colonial policing is a collaborative effort, and finally, colonial policing is an existentially relative, not essentially absolute, phenomenon. It offers up the idea of ��people��s polic-ing�� and ��collaborative policing�� to debunk the myth that colonial policing is a one-sided (British) and unidirectional (top down) affairs. The contention here is ��it takes two to Tango��. Section III reveals the ��The True Nature of Colonial Policing�� summaries as it discusses the implications of the findings while Section IV is a ��Conclusion�� that takes stock of lessons learned.
Chapter 3 ��Assessing Colonial Policing�� provides an assessment of colo-nial policing, theoretically and empirically. The chapter proposes adopting a multifaceted cultural model instead of a dualistic conflict framework in analysing and assessing the HKP as a colonial force. It further observed that the use of Western legitimacy test to gauge citizen approval or acceptance of HKP is ill advised. Specifically, it argued that, in the context of Hong Kong and with the Chinese people, a process-based political legitimacy test is not as appropriate as a performance-based social acceptance test. In Chinese terms people��s livelihood is more important than people��s democratic rights in evaluating the sufficiency and acceptability of government. The chapter then discusses a first-of-its-kind assessment of the HKP by serving Chinese officers in 1960s. The chapter concludes with the call for more study of how Chinese culture impacts on colonial policing and vice versa.
Chapter 4 is on ��Policing with Hong Kong Characteristics��. This chapter explored the defining features of colonial policing in Hong Kong; addressing the question of what makes colonial policing in Hong Kong unique. The sup-position is that policing of whatever persuasions�Xcolonial, communist or democratic�Xtakes on local colour when applied108 and must be customised to be effective.109
This chapter is organised into six sections. Section I ��Colonial Policing as Policing Chinese�� discusses how the Hong Kong colonial officials faced up to difficulties in policing the Chinese communities. Section II is on ��Colonial Policing as ��Chinese�� Policing��. It investigates into how Chinese policing Chinese works in philosophical, theoretical and practical terms. Section III ��Colonial Policing as ��Self-Help�� Policing�� advances a ��Theory of Chinese Policing�� (formally, ��State Police Powers as a Social Resource Theory�� (STR) that looks at policing with the people and not the state��s perspective. Section IV ��Colonial Policing as Policing Migrants�� looks into the effect of residency status of control subject on policing strategy and tactics. This gives rise to the issue of relationship policing, from inti-mate to stranger. (Section V: ��Colonial Policing as Relationship Policing.��) Recounting Mao Tse-tung��s theory of contradiction, Section V postulates that the more intimate the relationship, the less the need for coercive polic-ing. Section VI is a ��Conclusion��.
The beginning of the second part of the book is marked by Chapter 5: ��Police Reform Literature��, which variously investigates into the nature, topologies, conduct, impact and assessment of police reform. Section II ��HKP Reform Inquiries�� reports on a number of high-profile ��HKP Reform Inquires��, from The Caldwell Commission (1858) to the Sir Alastair Blair-Kerr Commission (1973) to The Coopers & Lybrand Consultant Report (1993) to Hong Kong Audit Commission (1999) to Lan Kwai Fong Disaster Report (1993) to Hong Kong Audit Commission (1999). Section III is a brief ��Conclusion��.
Chapter 6 ��Colonial Policing in Hong Kong�� has five sections. ��Policing with Colonial Characteristics�� (Section I) provides us with a list of defining characteristics of colonial policing: a macro picture. It allows us to look at (colonial) policing in Hong Kong in snap shots: historically, locally, culturally and politically. Section II ��Historical Developments of the HKP�� provides an official view of how the HKP develops over time. This allows one to see how HKP sees its own development. ��Colonial Policing: Continuity and Change�� (Section III) informs us on how it is like to police Hong Kong in different era, 1880s and 1920s, with three case studies of police careers, two in officer��s voice. This allows us to see ��up close and personal�� how the HKP and polic-ing in Hong Kong have changed, over time. Section IV ��Police Reformers�� discusses selected HKP senior officers who have contributed to HKP reform or leave a mark. It makes the point that police reform is as much about per-sonality as it is about leadership. Section IV is a brief ��Conclusion��. All told, this chapter allows readers to see HKP reform in different light, making this an enrichment project.
Chapter 7 describes the ��Formation of Hong Kong Police in 1840s��, to be compared with HKP reform in the 1950s, later. This chapter has seven sections. Section I is on ��Crimes in Hong Kong��, which discusses crime and disorder problems in Hong Kong before and after British took possession in 1849. Section II is a discussion on ��Crime Control Measures�� being deployed to fight crime, addressing the issue of why such discriminatory and harsh measures�X��brute suppression and divisive seclusion���Xwere necessary. Section III ��Policing in Hong Kong�� is about how Chief Magistrate, Captain William Caine, Hong Kong��s first police chief fought crime and maintained order. Section IV ��The Legal Framework�� describes and discusses the provi-sions, merits and impact of various police laws, from Police Force Ordinance to Gambling Ordinance to Native Chinese Peace Officer Ordinance, and others (��The legal framework��) on policing and Chinese community. Coming to the last two sections, ��V. The Police Laws and Role of HKP�� and ��VI. Police Leadership and Policing in Hong Kong��, the chapter turns to discussing the role of HKP in enforcing the law (V) and the impact of police leadership on policing Hong Kong (VI). The chapter concludes (VII) with two major obser-vations, namely, first, from its inception HKP as a colonial force functioned less as a legal agent than a moral and culture one. Second, in its formative years, the HKP was led by powerful men, strong characters and colourful personalities, as in the case of Cain, May and Deane. This observation allows us to conclude that personal leadership, not rules or system, drives and defines policing in Hong Kong, until well into the 1960s and 1969s.
Chapters 8 and 9 are devoted to ��Police Reform in 1950s�� and should be read together, with the Chapter 8 explaining on data and method, and Chapter 9 devoted to presenting on major findings and conclusion.
Chapter 8 informs us of the data, context and framework of the research into ��Police Reform in 1950s��. In the main, it provides a foundation for Chapter 9 to build upon. Section I ��Research Data�� describes data consulted and analysis framework adopted. Section II ��Context of Reform�� is devoted to discussing a number of contexts helpful in understanding HKP reform in the 1950s, such as social, political, cultural and law and order context. Section III ��Direction of Reform�� informs us as to where the HKP is heading with the reform, gathered from official pronouncements, for example Commissioner of Police or Governor of Hong Kong, or private opinion, for example, experts. After being informed of the ��Context�� and ��Direction�� of reform, we are ready to discuss ��Process and Methods of Reform�� in ��Decolonisation�� (Section IV) and ��Localisation�� (Section V).
The final chapter, Chapter 9 ��Hong Kong Police Reform in 1950s�� build-ing upon Chapter 8, investigates into HKP reform and development in the 1950s�V1960s, as compared with HKP reform in 1840s and after 1990s. As a whole, this chapter makes three claims.
First, HKP modernisation reform began in 1950s. It was substantially completed by 1960s. There were two objectives to the reform, that is, making the HKP less colonial (a liberation process) and making it more modern (a professionalisation exercise).
Second, of all the HKP reforms, past and present, the 1950 HKP reform counts as one of the most ambitious and transformative. It created the HKP in its modern form, with brand new structure, different process and pro-gressive ethos to match. It gave birth to the HKP as we know it today, as a legalised, modernised and communalised force, all be it in an embryotic state. The 1950 reform also laid the foundation and provided the platform for future police reform in Hong Kong, such as 1997 reform.
Third, the much-hyped 1997 HKP reform110 was neither new nor innova-tive, in conception, process or outcome. It was built upon an old (though not worn) reform platform, with much continuity amidst gradual changes, from the past (1950).
This chapter is organised as follows. Section I is on ��Localisation��. It is followed by ��Legalisation�� (Section II), ��Modernisation�� (Section III), ��Communalisation�� (Section IV), and ��Organisation�� (Part V). Section VI is a ��Conclusion�� summarising the lessons learned and contribution made by this book.
Endnotes
1. J. Carroll, Edge of Empires: Chinese Elites and British Colonials in Hong Kong (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005), p. 21. British Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston; ��a barren island with hardly a house upon it.��
2. C. Elliot, Hong Kong��s first administrator British Superintendent of Trade in China, as with Pottinger, first governor of Hong Kong, felt otherwise. He felt that Hong Kong was best fit to serve British interest in replacing Macau as the centre for economic, political, military and diplomatic activities in China. J..Carroll, A Concise History of Hong Kong (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007), p. 5.
3. T-W. Ngo, Hong Kong��s History: State and Society under Colonial Rule (New York: Psychology Press, 1999), p. 1.
4. Canton Register, Vol. 12, No. 11�V12th March 1839. http://www.houghton.idv.hk/?p=22
5. Canton Register, Vol. 9, No. 18�V3rd May 1836. http://www.houghton.idv.hk/?p=22
6. Ibid.
7. J. Morris, Hong Kong (New York: Random House Digital, 1987).
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
10. Canton Register, Vol. 12, No. 3�X15th January 1839. http://www.houghton.idv.hk/?p=22
11. I. Loader, Plural policing and democratic governance, Social Legal Studies, 9 (3): 323�V345, 2000.
12. J. Osterhammel, Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview (Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener Pub, 1997), p. viii.
13. J.-f. Tsai, Hong Kong in Chinese History: Community and Social Unrest in the British Colony, 1842�V1913 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1955).
14. K. C. Wong, Black��s theory on the behavior of law revisited III: Law as more or less governmental social control, International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 26 (3): 365�V392, 1998.
15. G. B. Endacott, Government and People in Hong Kong, 1841�V1962: A Constitutional History (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1964), p. 6.
16. E. H. Pritchard, The struggle for control of the China Trade during the eigh-teenth century, Pacific Historical Review, 3 (3): 280�V285, 281, 1934.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid.
19. J. L. Cranmer-Byng and A. Shepherd, A reconnaissance of Ma Wan and Lantao Islands in 1794, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Hong Kong Branch, 4: 105�V125, 107, 1964.
20. E. H. Pritchard, The struggle for control of the China Trade during the eigh-teenth century, Pacific Historical Review, 3(3): 280�V285, 281, 1934.
21. A. Robins, Almost Liberal: The British Government of Hong Kong in the Middle Nineteenth Century, 2003 (��Hong Kong serves as an interesting test case for the universalistic aspirations of British liberalism in the mid-1800s��). http://www.stanford.edu/group/journal/cgi-bin/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Robbins_Hum_2003.pdf
22. The pledge of free trade was repeated by Sir Pottinger, second governor of Hong Kong (10 August 1841 to 8 May 1844). E. J. Eitel. Europe in China: The History of Hong Kong from the Beginning to the Year 1882 (London: Luzac & Co., 1895), p. 282 (��Eitel��).
23. Eitel, pp. 1�V2.
24. Captain Elliot tenure ended on 10 August 1841 and was replaced by Sir H. Pottinger as Plenipotentiary. He departed the Colony on 24 August 1841. Eitel, p. 177. He was later appointed the Counsel General of Texas on 1 June 1842 by Sir Robert Peel. Ibid. 265.
25. Eitel, p. 164.
26. Eitel, p. 164.
27. Much like the political settlement in returning Hong Kong to China, with ��One Country Two Systems�� of governance. K.C. Wong, One Country Two Systems: Cross-Border Crime between Hong Kong and China (New Brunswick, NJ; London: Transaction Publishers, 2012), ��Chapter 7: Policy Analysis��, pp. 165�V193.
28. In 1987, the author was doing business�Xsetting up a fish farm�Xin China. The author was arrested and detained for Chinese Public Security Officers (police) for not registering at a hotel. The author asked for intervention of the U.S. gov-ernment on account of his U.S. citizenship. The lead Pubic Security officer used the above to describe the author��s national status.
29. K. C. Wong, One Country Two Systems: Cross-Border Crime between Hong Kong and China (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2012).
30. Eitel, p. 183.
31. Eitel, p. 185.
32. Ibid. Barracks were erected on Cantonment Hill, Stanley and Aberdeen.
33. Eitel, p. 182.
34. R. Hughes, Borrowed Place, Borrowed Time: Hong Kong and Its Many Faces (London: Andre Deutsch Ltd, 1976).
35. See Chinese Repository, Vol., V.�VAugust, 1936�VNo. 4: European periodi-cals beyond Ganges�XCanton Register. First published in Canton on 8 November.1827 and printed every two weeks, it was one of China��s first English-language newspapers. ��The free traders appear to cherish high hopes of their claims and privileges. Under their auspices, a free press is already maintained at Canton. They will regard themselves as the depositories of the true principles of British commerce��, Charles Grant Canton Register, 8, 1835.
36. Canton Register, Vol. 9, No. 18�X3rd May 1836.
37. Ibid.
38. Canton Register, Vol. 15, No. 13�X29th March 1842.
39. Canton Register, Vol. 14, No. 34�X24th August 1841.
40. Friend of China 2.6.42 edition.
41. Chapter 8: W. Cain, In: pp. 60�V88. G. B. Endacott, A Biographical Sketch-Book of Early Hong Kong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2005). William Caine was born in 1798. He lived his life with the army since being a child. He aspired to be an officer when young. He was commissioned in 1841 and was known for his efficiency and devotion to duty. He came to China as part of an expeditionary force. He landed the job as Chief Magistrate, in part because he was a member of the Mili-tary Commission of Control at Chusan island and Chief Magistrate there (p. 60).
42. Ibid., p. 61.
43. Friend of China 5.5.42 edition.
44. R. Fortune, Three Years�� Wanderings in the Northern Provinces of China, Including a Visit to the Tea, Silk, and Cotton Countries (London: John Murray, 1847), pp. 27�V29.
45. Friend of China, 9.6.42 edition.
46. Friend of China, 16.6.42 edition.
47. Friend of China, 23.6.42 edition.
48. Canton Register, Vol. 15, No. 26, 28th June 1842.
49. Friend of China, 21.7.42 edition.
50. Hence, the Chinese name for rates ��Chai. Heung�� (�t��) which literally mean ��official rate��. HKP was known as ����t�� (Hong Kong officials). https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%B7%AE%E9%A4%89
51. Friend of China, 31.8.43 edition.
52. Chapter 12: C. B. Hiller, In: pp. 84�V88. G. B. Endacott, A Biographical Sketch-Book of Early Hong Kong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2005).
53. Canton Register, Vol. 15, No. 22, 31st May 1842.
54. Friend of China, 3.8.43 edition.
55. Lieutenant-Colonel J.S. Malcolm to Secretary Lord Stanley, letter of 22.December 1843 (Source: C0129/4).
56. ��The British Bobby�� Hong Kong Police Ancestor September 2, 2012. http://.hongkongpoliceancestors.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-bristol-bobbies.html
57. Chapter 15: ��Charles May��, In: pp. 100�X104, G. B. Endacott with new introduc-tion by John M. Carroll, Biographical Sketch-Book of Early Hong Kong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2005).
58. F. C. Ming, Reluctant Heroes: Rickshaw Pullers in Hong Kong and Canton, 1874�V1954 (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2005).
59. P. Snow, The Fall of Hong Kong: Britain, China and the Japanese Occupation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2005).
60. N. Miller, The localization of the Hong Kong police force, 1842�V1947, The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 13 (3): 1990.
61. S. H. Lo, Policing and Policy Transfer: Is Mainland China Learning from Hong Kong? Hong Kong Institute of Education. Center for Government and Citizenship, 2011.
62. K. Fang, Britain��s finest: The Royal Hong Kong police. In: Antoinette Burton, After the Imperial Turn: Thinking with and through the Nation (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2003), pp. 293�V307.
63. Parliamentary Papers, House of Commons and Command, Vol. 48 (London: Her Majesty��s Stationery Office, 1860). http://books.google.com/books?id=cvkSAAAAYAAJ&dq=Hong+Kong+Police,+Caldwell+Inquiry&source=gbs_navlinks_s
64. Chapter 13: T. C. Anstey, In: pp. 89�V99. G. B. Endacott with new introduction by J. M. Carroll, Biographical Sketch-Book of Early Hong Kong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2005), pp. 93�Vm94. See a Vindication of the Character of the Undersigned from the Aspersions of Mr. T. Chisholm Anstey, Ex-attorney General of Hong Kong as Contained in His Charges, His Pamphlet, and His Letter to the Secretary of State for the Colonies (1860).
65. ��Eric��s words of wisdom,�� OffBeat Issue 705, 20 June to 3 July 2001.
66. Ibid.
67. K. Hopkins (ed.), Hong Kong: The Industrial Colony (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1971), p. 339.
68. F. Ching, Looking back: How London and Beijing decided the fact of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Journal Online. 10 April 2010. http://www.hkjournal.org/archive/2010_summer/2.htm
69. Article 1, Joint Declaration of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the People��s Republic of China on the Question of Hong Kong (Beijing, 19 December 1984).
70. ��Paragraph 3(12) of the Joint Declaration provides that the basic policies of the People Republic of China (PRC) regarding Hong Kong will be stipulated in a Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region promulgated by the National People��s Congress (NPC) of the PRC, and will remain unchanged for 50 years��. See generally ��Constitution and Administration��, in Hong Kong 1989: A Review of 1988 (Hong Kong: Government Printing Office, 1989), especially p. 52.
71. E. Gargan, ��Hong Kong fears unraveling of rule of law,�� New York Times, 7 May 1997.
72. ��Sorry out of question as Ho lauds enforcing rule of law��, The Standard, 1 April 2011. (Seventy percent of people support Hong Kong��s police to enforce the law. Only 20% like hurling bananas and occupying the street. The street belongs to Hong Kong people��.)
73. ��How the Hong Kong Police Created the Conditions for the People to Criticize.the Government��. (Yang Hengjun��s blog), 14 March 2010. http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20100315_1.htm
74. M. Foucault, Naissance de la biopolitique. Cours au College de France. 1978�V1979 (Paris: Gallimard/Seuil, 2004). Victor Tadros, ��Between Governance and Discipline: The Law and Michel Foucault��, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 18.(1): 75�V103, 1998.
75. Foucault defines government as conduct, more precisely as ��conduct of conduct��.
76. In Imperial China, ��governmentality�� is actualised through ��self-cultivation��. Fabian Heubel (July 30�V6 August 2008). ��Foucault in Chinese: Methodological Reflections on a Transcultural Philosophy of Cultivation��, presented at the World Congress of Philosophy (Seoul, Korea), as reinforced by ��Confucianization of Law��. See K. C. Wong, ��Confucianization of Law: A Study of Speech Crime Prosecution in China��, Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law, 2004. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MurUEJL/2004/24.html
77. D. Black, Behavior of Law, 1976.
78. As used here ��predictability of conduct�� recalls ��predictive policing�� but they are not the same idea. While both speak to predicting criminality, the former is about reducing probability of victimisation, making society orderly, and the later is about preventing the potentiality of offending, holding criminal responsible. The former is present oriented, the later is future focused, that is, ��Minority Report�� revisited. Z. Friend, ��Predictive policing: Using technol-ogy to reduce crime��, FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin (April 2013). http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/2013/April/predictive-policing-using-technology-to-reduce-crime
79. C. Lemert, Foucault, Govern mentality, and critique, 2002. http://www.andosciasociology.net/resources/Foucault$2C+Governmentality$2C+and+Critique+IV-2.pdf
80. M. R. Dutton, Policing and Punishment in China: From Patriarchy to the People (London and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
81. J. Austin (1790�V1859), The Province of Jurisprudence Determined, (London: John Murray, 1832).
82. P. Rawlings, Policing before the police, In: T. Newburn (ed.), Handbook of Policing, 2nd edition (Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing, 2008).
83. K. C. Wong, State police power as a social resource theory. See Chapter 10 to D. Wisler, I. D. Onwudiwe, Community Policing: International Patterns and Comparative Perspectives (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2013), pp. 215�V257.
84. S. Ansari, Social capital and collective efficacy: Resource and operating tools of community social control, Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology, 5 (2): 75�V94, 2013.
85. C. D. Robinson and R. Scaglion, The origin and evolution of the police function in society: Notes towards a theory, Law & Society Review, 21 (1): 1987, 109�V154.
86. E. A. Ross, Social Control: Control A Survey of the Foundations of Order (Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2009) (1901).
87. Byron Brenan, The office of district magistrate in China, Shanghai Mercury Office, 1899.
88. H-C. W. Liu, The Traditional Chinese Clan Rules (June 1959).
89. ��Kant��s Social and Political Philosophy�� Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP). http://plato.stanford.edu/about.html
90. J. C. Turner, Explaining the nature of power: A three-process theory, European Journal of Social Psychology, 35: 1�V22, 2006.
91. D. H. Bayley and C. D. Shearing, The future of policing, Law & Society Review, 30 (3): 585�V606, 1996. (The monopoly of public police has been broken effec-tively since 1980 (p. 586), in favour of plurality of control and commodifica-tion in risk management, led by private policing and self-help policing (587). For a rejoinder, see T. Jones and T. Newburn, The transformation of policing? Understanding current trends in policing systems, British Journal of Criminology, 42 (1): 129�V146, 2002 (Acknowledging the trend but disputing the magnitude and extent of global transformation. The ��transformation thesis�� (Cohen and Shearing) based in large part on North American experience is not replicated in other parts of the world where tradition policing still dominates.
92. Chapter 2, K. C. Wong, Policing in China: History and Reform (New York: Peter Lang, 2009). (Doctrinally, Communist China conceived police as an instrumen-tality of the state: ��Police is a historical phenomenon. It originates with the state and disappears with the state. The basic characteristic (benzhi teshi) of police is an important instrumentality of the state to effectuate dictatorship (guojia zhuan-zheng gongju)�� Definition of ��Jingcha�� Chinese Public Security Encyclopedia (1989).
93. See ��Policing in Hong Kong as colonial policing��, infra.
94. T-W. Ngo (ed.), Hong Kong��s History: State and Society under Colonial Rule (New York: Routledge, 11 September 2002), p. 55.
95. Ernest Mandel, Marxist theory of the state (October 1969).
96. Politics as a Vocation (1919).
97. K. C. Wong, ��Black��s theory on the behavior of law revisited III: Law as more or less governmental social control, International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 26 (3): 365�V392, 1998.
98. P. Dan, ��Sovereignty��, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta.(ed.). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/sovereignty/.
99. ��A theory of more or less government control�� is anticipated by Weber to the extent that Weber makes allowance for delegation of state sovereign authority to use violence.
100. D��Entreves observes that the ��intrinsic logic of sovereignty�� speaks to its per-petuity, absoluteness, unity, indivisibility and the highest or ultimate power of law making. See D��Entreves, A. Passerin, The Nation of the State (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967), Ch. 5. See also J. Bodin: ��Majesty or sovereignty is the most high, absolute, and perpetual power over the citizens and subjects in a commonweal.�� Quotes by Alexander Passerin D��Entreves from Richard Knolles English translation of Bodin��s Les Six Livres de la Republique (1st ed., 1956): McRae, K. D. (ed.), The Six Books of a Commonweale (1606), (facsimile reprint, Harvard University Press, 1962). See also Daniel J. Elazar Exploring Federalism (Tuscalossa & London: University of Alabama Press, 1987) (In the Old World and traditional Europe, the state as a sovereign is undividable and holds all authority.), p. 11.
101. Not surprisingly, it takes the pragmatic and resourceful politicians to penetrate the ��black hole�� that is the state. In 1983, the People��s Republic of China (PRC), in order to achieve the political integration of Taiwan, is willing to give Taiwan a high degree of autonomy as a special administrative region (ASR) of the PRC, including the powers to make domestic law and the command of its army. See the policy of ��one country, two system�� as advocated by Deng in his speeches of 26.June 1983, 22 October 1984, 31 October 1984, 2 September 1986, 16 May 1989, 15 September 1990 in The Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping (Beijing: Foreign Language Press, 1993). See also discussion in Lo Chi Kin, ��Relations across the Taiwan Straits in China Review�� (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 1993), Ch. 4.
102. It is often assumed that the delegation of social control rights comes with them social control responsibilities or vice versa. This need not be the case. The del-egation of social control rights and imposition of social control responsibilities are two entirely different governmental delegations. Take the case of children��s discipline and control as an example. Until very recently and under the com-mon law, the parents were given the rights and responsibilities to discipline and otherwise control the children. Lately, the parental rights to discipline has been interfered with, for example, law against physical punishment, and the opportunity to control has been diminished, for example, law restricting (defin-ing) parents�� rights on abortion consent. However, increasingly the parents are being held civilly and criminally responsible for their children��s misconduct or illegal acts. The theoretical question which needs to be addressed at some point is how the delegation of social control rights and delegation of social control responsibilities, separately or together, affects the behaviour of law. For exam-ple, what is the sociological significance on the behaviour of law (exercising of parental discipline and control) of imposing on the parents a set of children��s disciplinary responsibilities without giving the parents the right to discipline? Can we expect more or less discipline? How might such discipline be distrib-uted in the social space?
103. Constitutional rights are also called fundamental, basic and organic rights. As used here, they are rights pertaining to the structure of government, par-ticularly the distribution of powers of government with respect to the people. If we conceived of the government being vested with the rights and respon-sibilities to enforce law, that is, secure governmental social control, to start with, then any delegation of those rights and responsibilities, for example, to make (legislative), enforce (executive) and interpret law (judicial) amounts to a redistribution.
104. Private social control is converted into governmental social control in two ways, that is, through government sponsorship of private social control or government delegation of public social control rights. In the first case, the government lends its support to what essentially is a private activity. In the later case, the government allows the private party to be deputised as state social control agent. Where government participation ends, government del-egation begins.
105. In political and practical terms, the debate is between a rival (horizontal) relationship or dominant (vertical�Vcentral vs. local) relationship. In the rival case, the terms of engagement is negotiated. In the dominant case, the terms of engagement are dictated. My insight is drawn in part from recent political settlement talks over the return of Hong Kong to China, the absentee sover-eign, after 1997 and the re-integration of Taiwan with China the motherland, in the distant (near?) future. A ��One country�Xtwo system�� model is proposed for Hong Kong. A ��One county�Xtwo region�� is proposed for Taiwan. Terms for the return of Hong Kong to the PRC are dictated. Terms for the reinte-gration of Taiwan with the PRC are negotiated. See Byron Weng, ��Sovereign Split�XTowards a Theory of Divided Nation��, in Professorial Inaugural Lecture Series 20 (Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1995), pp. 21�V37, especially 23�V33.
106. The development of this concept is necessary for studying the Confucianisation of Qing law.
107. J.-P. Brodeur, ��High policing and low policing: Remarks about the policing of political activities��, Social Problems, 30 (5): 507�V20, 1983.
108. C. M. Christensen & Raynor, Why hard-nosed executives should care about management theory, Harvard Business Review, 81 (9): 66�V74, 2003.
109. D. Jianzhong, On several problems in legal transplantation, Journal of Politics and Law, 2 (3): 107�V109, September, 2009.
110. P. Tam, From Enforcement to Service Delivery: A Study of Strategic Change in the Hong Kong Police Force. MPA dissertation, Hong Kong University, 2012. As a HKP officer, Tam observed the successful transformation of HKP from a law enforcement agency to a service organisation with the arrival of New Public Management against the backdrop of 1997. The author did not place HKP reform in a historical context. He used limited contemporary sources, such as Lo and Cheuk on community policing to make his case.

Table I.1.Governmental Delegation of Public Social Control (Policing) Authoritya: An Analytical Framework

Theoretical Concepts
Operational Definition
Example (Ideal Type)

Government delegation of police powers
Delegation of social control authorityb�Xthe redistribution of government��s constitutional power to use force to enforce the law and maintain (political or social) order
Constitution provisions
enabling legislation

Delegation of norm-defining authority�Xthe extent to which the government delegates the authority to define normative expectation
Government social control philosophy
Jurisprudential thought
Law enforcement policy

Delegation of norm-setting authority�Xthe extent to which the government delegates the authority to set normative expectations
Police legislation
Police adm. rules

Delegation of norm-enforcing authority�Xthe extent to which the government delegates the authority to seek compliance with the normative expectations
Policing

a The delegation of state authority thus can be analysed along three critical dimensions: scope of authority delegated (i.e., jurisdiction), nature of authority delegated (i.e., norm defining vs. norm setting vs. norm enforcing) and coercive authority delegated (fine vs. imprison-ment vs. deadly force)
b The delegation of state authority necessarily implies the delegation of power to use force to secure the delegated authority. Thus Black��s Law Dictionary defines authority as: ��Right to exercise powers; to implement and enforce laws; to exact obedience; to command; to judge�K Often synonymous with power.�� (Abridged Sixth Edition) (St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co., 1991), p. 89.





Table I.2.Governmental Sponsorship of Private Social Control Measures: An Analytical Framework

Theoretical Concepts
Operational Definitions
Example (Ideal Type)

Government endorsement
(passive�Xsponsorship)
Endorsement�Xthe extent to which the government accepts and approves of the existence of private social control or self help
Neighbourhood watcha

Countenance�Xthe extent to which the government tolerates the existence of private social control
Vigilante, self-helpb

Approval�Xthe extent to which the government tacitly acknowledges the existence of private social control
Guardian Angelc

Endorsement�Xthe extent to which the government affirmatively approves of the existence of private social control
Community watch

Government involvement
(active�Xsponsorship)
Involvement�Xthe extent to which the government actively participates in bringing about the private social control scheme
Family disciple over juvenile

Promotion�Xthe extent to which to which the governments takes steps to establish, maintain, expand or improve the private social control scheme
��Crime Stoppers��d

Sanction�Xthe degree to which the government made available legal sanctions and resources for private social control
Non-intervention in domestic abusee

Enforcement�Xthe degree to which the government actively corroborates with private social control agency in enforcing private social control regiment
Family discipline over Juvenilef

a J. Garofalo and M. McLeod, The structure and operations of neighborhood watch programs in the United States, Crime and Delinquency 35: 326�V344, 1989. (The police works closely with the residents by providing training, speakers and liaison.)
b J. B. Perry, Jr. and M.D. Pugh, Public support of guardian angels: Vigilante protection against crime, Toledo, Ohio, 1984, Sociology and Social Research 73: 129�V131, 1989.
c See S. Pennell, C. Curtis, and J. Henderson, Guardian Angels: An Assessment of Citizens Responses to Crime, vol. 2, technical report to the NIJ (San Diego, CA: San Diego Association of Governments, 1985).
d D. P. Rosenbaum, A. Lurigio, and P. J. Lavrakas, Enhancing citizen participation and solving serious crime: A national evaluation of crime stoppers programs, Crime and Delinquency 35: 401�V420, 1989.
e J. D. Hirschel, I. W. Hutchison, C. W. Dean, and A-M. Mills, Review essay on the Lae enforce-ment responses of spouse abuse: Past, present, and future, Justice Quarterly 9: 247�V283, 1992. S. F. Berk and D. R. Loseke, ��Handling�� family violence: Situational determinants of Police Arrest in Domestic Disturbances, Law and Society Review 317�V348, 1981. (Traditionally, police often refused to make an arrest even when the victim appeared to be in danger and requested that the assailant be arrested.)

f R. J. Lundman, R. E. Sykes, and J. P. Clark, Police control of juveniles: A replication, In: ed. R. J. Lundman, Police Behavior: A Sociological Perspective (N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1980), pp. 130�V151. State juvenile law allows the police to take into custody a child who is unruly, unmanageable or ungovernable. Georgia statue defines an unruly child as ��habitually disobe-dience, and ungovernable�� and ��deserts his home or place of abode��, Ga. Code Ann., S 15-11-2(12) (1990). See also R. K. Schutt and D. Dannefer, Detention Decisions in Juvenile Cases, JIN, JDs, and Gender, Law and Society Review 22: 509�V520, 1988. (A study of 2489 cases from N.J. found that six juvenile courts�� detention decisions are very much influenced by family configuration and parents, cooperation.) Evidence suggests that where family discipline fails, the criminal justice system begins.





I
Colonial Policing with Chinese Characteristics

4

Policing in Hong Kong

5

Study of Policing in Hong Kong

3

1
Study of Policing in Hong Kong
Introduction
The scholarly study and research of policing has been an uphill battle1 world-wide. Hong Kong is no exception. To many police officers, policing is a voca-tion,2 better learned from peers, on the job and in the street rather than through scholars, from books and at the library.3 From the police perspec-tive, the study and teaching of policing is best left to ��insiders�� and ��experts��. Here is a case in point:
At one of the author��s presentations at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) ��Police Forum�� (3 September 2011), a young Ph.D. student related his experience with teaching police officers. A number of HKP officers chal-lenged the Ph.D. student��s understanding of the HKP. They claimed the young teacher lacked personal experience and access to implicit knowledge of how policing works in practice.
On another occasion, when this author was making an invited presen-tation at a professional development seminar in the HKP Police College on 16 October 2009, a police commissioner in the audience openly and point-edly raised issues with the relevancy and practicality of ��academic�� approach to community policing in Hong Kong, without knowing that much of the presentation was drawn from personal street experience and feedback from police officers across the world.
Both encounters point to the same problem: there is a wide gap between academic and professional policing within the HKP. Some note that the gap is shortening (personal discussion with Deputy Director, Hong Kong Police College, 3 September 2011), many others observe that it is not get-ting narrower (many discussions with the author��s HKP students), and more than a few think that it is widening (retired CSP, former head Police Cadet School, 1�V2 September 2011). All agree that the best hope for nar-rowing the gap is for police scholars and policing practitioners to meet and discuss more,4 with scholars accepting practitioners�� experience-based implicit knowledge and practitioners deferring to scholars�� research based on scientific process. The best is, of course, an integration of both by way of practitioner-scholar or scholar-practitioner approach to knowledge genera-tion and distribution.5
Focus and Organisation
This chapter investigates into police study and research as an emerging disci-pline in Hong Kong. This study has two objectives, that is, to provide a brief account of police study and research development in Hong Kong on the way to proposing a new way of studying of the HKP, that is, ��inside out�Vbottom up�� approach.6
This chapter comprises four sections. The first section ��Police Study in Hong Kong: A Brief History�� traces the development of studying policing in Hong Kong. The second section reviews some noteworthy research and publications about the HKP. The third section discusses some of the difficul-ties, problems and issues in conducting research on policing in Hong Kong and into the HKP. The main problems are a lack of scholarly interest, data and capacity. The fourth section is a ��Conclusion�� to the chapter. It observes that the HKP practised ��dual track�� policing in the colonial days (1841 to the 1950s). Thus, there are two realities to policing in Hong Kong, that is, top down�Xcolonial and professional�Xpolicing world versus bottom up�XChinese policing and street policing�Xworld, where more is known about the former than the latter. It is argued in this book that for the purpose of understanding colonial policing in Hong Kong, it is the latter that is more important. Such a knowledge gap can be narrowed with ��inside out and bot-tom up research��.
I: Police Study in Hong Kong: A Brief History
Introduction
In Hong Kong, policing research and study still lags far behind other tra-ditional academic disciplines, such as law, political science, sociology or criminology.7 The first-ever independent study of the HKP was the official investigation8 into the Attorney General Anstey9 versus Registrar General Caldwell affair,10 in 1858, with the former charging the latter with corruption in office.11
The second self-study of the HKP was mounted in 1877, this time over the need for HKP reform.
In August 1992, and in anticipation of 1997 reversion of political sover-eignty, the Law Reform Commission (LRC) investigated into police powers of stop, search, arrest and detention in Hong Kong leading to the publica-tion of ��Report on Arrest��. The report recommended the adoption of the U.K. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) to rein in abuse of police powers. The implementation of the LRC report was left to an inter-departmental working group chaired by the Security Branch (SB) consisting of all the disciplinary forces, ICAC and Legal Department that finally rec-ommended for the implementation of 30 of the 60 LRC recommendations, and another 21 accepted in principle. The working group report was first entertained by the Hong Kong Legislative Council in November 2006 to act on.12
The latest independent review of the HKP was conducted by the consult-ing firm Coopers & Lybrand on the eve of 1997 over the restructuring of the HKP (October 1992�VMarch 1993). The purpose of the study was to conduct a systematic and comprehensive review of the HKP management structure and make necessary preparation for the transfer of power on 1 July 1997.13 The report was completed in March 1993. It made 116 recommendations. It concluded that ��The Force already has a powerful culture14 and the question is whether this culture is appropriate to support and under pin the changes that are needed in order to continue to provide a high quality service to the public��.15 In 1 April 1994, the HKP Quality Service Wing was established to reform the HKP. After that the investigation of the HKP started to blossom, all in fits and starts.
As illustrated, a representative sample of scientific studies of the HKP and policing in Hong Kong from 1990 to 2012 includes the following:
1990: W. K. Che, The Triad Societies in Hong Kong in the 1990��s, 13 Police Studies: The International Review of Police Development 13: 151�V154, 1990. This article, in four sections, describes the origin and policy impli-cations of triad societies in Hong Kong. The research is based on observa-tions, interviews and case data by the author as an ��investigator�� (of ICAC). Its basic premise is that triad societies are losing all of its original purpose (anti--foreignism, first against Qing, then British), values (blood brotherhood, mutual aid), structure (centralised leadership, strict discipline) and process (ceremonies), and morphed in two directions. The more powerful groups became organised crime syndicates. The lesser street gangs claimed the alle-giances of the disaffected youths. As to policy, the author observed that the Hong Kong government was moving towards dealing with transformed tri-ads as organised criminals and emerging youth gangs with education (by former reformed triad members) and rehabilitations (p. 153).
1991: M. S. Gaylord and J. F. Galliher, Riding the underground dragon�XCrime control and public order on Hong Kong��s mass transit railway, British Journal of Criminology, 31 (1): 15�V26, 1991. ��This study examines the causes of the MTR��s remarkable success in providing to its patrons a nearly crime-free transportation system�� (p. 17). The authors conducted research through 5 months of field research, that is, riding on MTR and talking to people. The ability of the HKP to effectively patrol the long MTR lines and control mas-sive MTR passengers depends less on the HKP as on environmental engi-neering, technology support, shared responsibilities with the MTR staff and law-abiding culture and collective discipline of the HK people.
1993: I. Dobinson, Pinning a tail on the dragon: The Chinese and the international heroin trade, Crime & Delinquency 39 (3): 373�V385, 1993. The author investigated the organisation, power, reach and influence of Hong Kong organised criminals and triad societies in international (South East Asia) heroin trade mainly through interviews with police officials�XHKP, ICAC, HKAG, DEA (p. 373) and two case studies (378�V381), with few origi-nal data and limited secondary literature sources, and found that such claims of connection, dominance and influences are much inflated. The observation here is not that the HKP do not know what they are doing, it is just that their professional capacity and self-confidence (on matters as important as organised crime and drug trades) are subject to second -guessing by foreign experts, such as FBI. One would expect more from the ��Asia��s Finest��.
1994: M. S. Gaylord and H. Traver, Introduction to the Hong Kong Criminal Justice System (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1994).16 Chapter 3 focusses on ��The Royal Hong Kong Police��. It offers a descriptive account of the RHKP based on working knowledge rather than on extensive research. It is meant to be an informational and instructional piece for novices and students, rather than an analytical and critical piece for researchers and scholars. The chapter can still be considered a rare find of that period.
1998�V1999: B. Tully, Applied and forensic psychological contributions to policing and expert witness work: Collaboration and conflict. International Journal of Police Science Management, 1: 192, 1998�V1999. Bryan Tully was the head of the RHKP psychology unit when it was first set up in the 1980s. In the article, he related many instances where a psychologist was able to.help.the.HKP, including the use of cognitive interviews to solve crime (p..192). His services ranged from diffusing police complaints by understand-ing complainants�� true motives, such as paranoia (p. 192) to offering coun-selling for distressed officers (p. 198). The article shows that the HKP is a progressive force. It has long relied on scientists and expertise to investigate crimes and counsel staff.
2006: S. L. Shiu-hing, The politics of policing the anti-WTO protests in Hong Kong, Asian Journal of Political Science, 14(2): 140�V162, 2006. The 2005 anti-World Trade Organization (WTO) protestors versus HKP was explained with David Waddington��s flashpoint model. This article shows that other factors at the structural, political/ideological, cultural, contextual and situ-ational levels were at play, creating an environment conducive to violence. Waddington��s model provides a useful framework for us to comprehend the interactional dynamics of the anti-WTO protests in Hong Kong. However, it has neglected the possibility of an interactive bond between protestors and the public. The contextual uniqueness of forging a dynamic relation-ship between protestors and the public can enrich Waddington��s analytical framework.
2012: M. Chiu, Development and impacts of a new performance man-agement system in the Hong Kong police force, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 35 (3): 468�V490, 2012. ��The purpose of this paper is to outline the development and implementation of the ��values-driven competency-based performance management system�� (VDCBPMS) and report the findings of a study that aims to examine the effect of the new PMS on officers of the Hong Kong Police Force. �KThe research focuses on the officers�� perceptions and attitudes resulting from the intervention and hypothesises that the new system will increase their organisational [sic] com-mitment and job satisfaction, job-effort and value alignment with the Force, as well as overall performance of the Force through enhanced performance of individual officers. The study employs a staff survey and interviews with a cross section of officers in different ranks to examine the impact on them of VDCBPMS��.
Until very recently, no tertiary institution in Hong Kong offered police studies as a recognised degree subject. There was no demand for it. Few Hong Kong people, especially the university-bound ones, are attracted to policing as a career. Nor does the HKP require a university degree for being a police officer and promotion to high ranks.17 There is also little interest in studying policing because it is felt that there is little to study, and still less utility to studying. Simply, police studies�� degree is not a ��real�� degree. Those who want to study policing have to go abroad.18
In 1980, the HKP started a far-sighted programme of sending promising officers to study at local universities, for example, Department of Sociology or School of Law at University of Hong Kong, and Department of Government and Public Administration at Chinese University of Hong Kong,19 to groom future police managers and as an incentive for good performance. The programme was discontinued because many officers, especially those in law, resigned soon after they finished their university studies or were professionally qualified.
In the early 1980s, a group of criminal justice professionals, including police officers, gathered together informally at HKU to discuss criminal jus-tice issues, including policing.20 The group later evolved into the Hong Kong Society of Criminology in 1982 and lasts to this day.21 The objectives of the society include the following:
�E
To promote the discussion and dissemination of the latest interna-tional and local research on topics related to crime, law enforcement and criminal justice

�E
To promote awareness of the issues and problems involved in the control of crime and the administration of justice

�E
To encourage the discussion of ideas and practices that will assist in crime prevention, improve services to victims and the treatment of offenders

�E
To promote the role of criminology and develop the use of scientific approaches to the study of crime, victims, offenders and crime sup-pression in Hong Kong and neighbouring jurisdictions22


In the mid-1980s, a British university started to offer a distant learning undergraduate degree in policing, mainly for police officers. It was very pop-ular, but was discontinued for lack of qualified local tutors.23 The teaching materials were all based on the U.K. modules. No local instructional materi-als were developed or made available.
In 1996, the Open University of Hong Kong took the leadership to aggres-sively develop an undergraduate programme in police studies, with infusion of ample funds and resources, since the university catered to non-traditional students and working professionals, like the police and other disciplinary forces.24 At the time, there was also a growing demand for more professional education in the HKP, as part of a lifelong learning initiative. It was the first and only police studies programme at a local university, albeit a non--traditional one, at that time. It has since been very well received, especially as a career-building step.25 One of the problems then was with the mixing of police officers of all ranks, inhibiting free exchanges in class and project col-laboration outside school.
At about the same time, the School of Continuing Education of the Chinese University of Hong Kong also started to develop its own diploma courses in policing and security studies, with a view of offering undergradu-ate degrees in the not too distant future.26
In September 2000, Hong Kong University offered the first undergradu-ate criminal justice degree programme in Hong Kong. It attracted mostly in-service disciplinary officers from all fields�Xprison, customs, immigration and police.27
Later, the City University of Hong Kong developed an undergraduate criminology programme that dedicated itself to applied research, within the Department of Applied Social Science. ��Graduates may further their study in the more specialised fields by applying to PGD in Psychology, MSSc in Counseling, MSSc in Applied Sociology, MPhil or PhD in Criminology, offered by the department��.
For graduate education in policing, today, the Department of Sociology (Criminology) at University of Hong Kong offers one of the first graduate programmes in criminology at the masters and Ph.D. level. Many police graduate students also choose to study at the Department of Politics and Government Administration for an MPA, because of its administrative and policy orientation best fitting police managers�� needs.28
The Masters�� Program in Criminology at the University of Hong Kong was started in 1986:
The programme consists of four core courses�XCriminal Justice: Process and Politics; Methods of Research for Criminology; Social Theory and Crimi-nology; and Theoretical Criminology�Xwhich aim to equip students with a strong practical and theoretical foundation in sociological criminology. In addition, students choose four elective subjects, which encompass the range of expertise in the Department. Courses currently offered include Crime and Deviance in PR China; White Collar and Corporate Crime; Cultural Criminology; Youth and Delinquency; Drugs and Crime; Policing: An International Perspective; Crime and Media; Gender and Crime. Full-time students will also be required to complete a dissertation, in which student learning will be consolidated and developed in an original field project.29
The Master in Criminology programme is geared towards police officers and other disciplinary services, for example, ICAC, custom and immigra-tion. When it was first launched, it was oversubscribed with a ratio of 10 to 1, most of them police officers. HKP officers also pursue police-related studies in the MPA stream, offered by HKU.
HKU offered a newly minted Bachelor in Criminal Justice in September 2000 with 67 students enrolling; nearly all of them were police officers.
At a sub-degree level, the Police Study Diploma offered by the School of Continuing Education, Chinese University of Hong Kong is specifically designed to cater to the needs of HKP officers at a lower rank, for exam-ple, some courses in the curriculum teach very rudimentary police skills, for example, English and first aid. It is also in heavy demand and over--subscribed, given the transformation of the HKP, in expectation, lifestyle and culture, for example, lifelong learning. The teachers are mostly retired or serving police officers.
Until recently, instructional materials on criminal justice and policing were imported. These materials were taken from Portsmouth University, Leicester University and Hull University, England, which were active in criminal justice and security studies since the 1980s and produced con-tent from experiences within the United Kingdom. Substantively, there are thus few research-based instructional materials with local content and local context.30 More significantly, there is little attempt to conduct research or develop theory of policing based on Chinese society.31
In 2002, this author organised the first international police conference in Hong Kong, the third Asian Association Police Studies (AAPS) as the presi-dent of the AAPS. The thematic title of the 2002 AAPS conference�X��Asian Policing in the 21st Century���Xfocussed attention on the following Asian police studies needs:
1. There is a need to study police problems and issues that are of local concern, with local content and in local context. As Professor Brogden observed at this AAPS conference: ��Policing has to be tailored to social context and to the local history of police�Vsociety relation-ships�Xwhether it is in downtown Chicago, ��new�� territories such as Papua New Guinea, or transitional societies faced with major crime problems��.32 The reason is a simple one. Social problems are local in origin and so must the (police) response, and associated studies.33
2. There is a need to study police problems and issues from an Asian indigenous (theoretical) perspective and with local (empirical) data. In Wong and Wong��s research into policing computer crime in China, they conducted ��a comprehensive and exhaustive review of the English language legal literature and find that research in the area is limited in scope, lacking in theoretical orientation, inade-quate in empirical support, superficial in analysis, and above all not giving necessary and adequate attention to indigenous perspective and local empirical data��.34
3. There is a need to investigate the cause, process and effect of changes�Xevolution or revolution, positive or natural�Xto Asian police and policing at the dawn of a new century.
In the author��s inauguration speech, he championed for the establish-ment of a Hong Kong police studies discipline and research field that is informed by indigenous theory and supported by local empirical data, with an ��inside-out, bottom-up�� approach.
The 2002 AAPS conference was a milestone in Hong Kong police study and research. It served to launch the study of the HKP and policing in Hong Kong with Chinese characteristic. It charted the course for future study in Asia policing, including Hong Kong.
Looking into the future, there are two approaches, in opposite direc-tions, that the Asian police study and research can move towards. The first is to focus on the uniqueness of historical traditions, local context and indig-enous perspective, or the ��local context�� approach. The other is to focus on the universality and generality of policing all over the world by comparing police experiences across borders, between people and cross-culturally, or the ��comparative study�� approach.
How can the ��local context�� approach be effectively implemented and actualised? One strategy is to promote collaborative and cooperative research efforts between police scholars and practitioners.35 Collaboration and cooperation can be achieved in many ways. One way is to allow or invite police ��outsiders�� (scholars) to study police.36 The other is to encourage police ��insider��37 (serving police officers) to study police.38
Commissioner Lee of the HKP presentation at the AAPS conference exemplified the insider��s approach. The paper is written from an ��insider��s�� perspective. It is also based on local knowledge and practical experience. This contributes to the development of police scholarship with local content and in local context. This is most important if police study and research in Hong Kong is to move ahead.
Yet another alternative is to have police ��insider�� (former police officers) turned academic ��outsider�� (scholars) to study police.39
The comparative study approach was exemplified by the field works of Dr. Krishnamurthy, a senior police practitioner�Vscholar from India (��Trends in Community Policing and the Option to Innovate as Well as Internalize New Ideas in People��s Participation in Building Safe Societies��) and Professor Brogden, an eminent police scholar from Ireland (��The Export of Community Policing�XBuyer Beware��).
In his presentation, Krishnamurthy reported upon his field observa-tion of community policing in six jurisdictions worldwide: Singapore, San Francisco, San Diego, Dallas, New York and Manchester, and five cities in India, namely, Bombay, New Delhi, Hyderabad, Chennai and Bangalore. He came to the conclusion that community policing is the answer to effective democratic policing.
This is the direction in which Hong Kong police study and research should be heading. As yet, the comparative police studies discipline, unlike other more established fields, for example, political science and anthropol-ogy, has not made any fruitful attempt, much less achieved any demonstrable results, in this most critical area of systematic comparative research.40
In hindsight, 15 years later, Hong Kong police study and research has blossomed and borne fruits, but there is still a lot more work to be done in infusing it with local content and context41 and engaging in more cross--cultural comparison.42
II: Research Output43
Thesis/Dissertations/Articles
Apart from a few doctoral44 and a master��s thesis,45,46 mostly by serving police officers, and a handful of published articles, an occasional paper and book chapters (many of questionable quality), there were very few scientific studies of the HKP or policing in Hong Kong, until well into the 1990s.
A careful and critical examination of HKP officers�� academic output provides readers with a ground-zero view of the HKP and policing in Hong Kong by serving officers at the grassroots and in the frontline. They also -provide.lots of insider information, which would otherwise not be easily accessible. A case in point is the MPA dissertation by Lo Yam, Wai-chun, Yvonne (�c���f��) on ��A Balanced Approach to Training: Another Step Forward in Improving Retention of Junior Police Constables��47 (1994). Lo��s work was built upon another officer��s work, namely, Ip, Choi-ching, Amfium; ����.��s An Evaluation of Training Programmes for Constables in the Royal Hong Kong Police Force, Master of Social Science, Dissertation, Department of Political Science Faculty of Social Science, University of Hong Kong (1984).
Ip��s dissertation is a description and evaluation of the Royal Hong Kong Police over 10 years (1974�V1984). It professes three research objectives. First, it documents policy and regiment of RHKP constable training between 1974 and 1984, noting its changes and impact. Second, it evaluates RHKP constable training, noting its effectiveness and limitations, problems and issues. Third, it provides recommendations for future improvements (Aims of the Study, p. 15).
From Lo one learns about the history, philosophy, policy and more impor-tantly programme implementation and impact of the HKP training regimen.
One learns about the importance of training to the HKP. Training prepares employees for the job, socialises employees into the organisation and helps the employees to reach their fullest potentials. With the HKP, good training also helps in attracting recruits and securing retention. Here, one finds that at the beginning of April 1989, the HKP rank-and-file officers were steadily declin-ing; there was a retention and recruitment problem. In 1991�V1992, for politi-cal (uncertainties) and economic (boom) reasons, the HKP failed to reach its recruitment targets by 2310. A study group was formed to study the problem with recruitment and retention of JPO. In 1992�V1993, the recruitment fell still shorter of targets by 9%, that is, 1785 (recruits)/1890 (target). In May 1992, the study group made 42 recommendations, including more civilian staff, higher female ratio, better staff relations and better pay and benefits (p. 4, n. 1).
Training contributes to retention because (1) Training shows that the employer is committed to doing the job right and in delivering the best ser-vices possible. This helps build organisational identity, culture and morale. (2) Training shows that that employer cares about the well-being of the employees and inspires loyalty. (3) Training helps the employees to be prepared for work and fit into the organisation. It reduces a sense of frustration due to incompe-tence and alienation due to lack of belonging. This reduces incentives to leave. (4) Training reduces distance and differences between individual employees and groups, unifying and integrating them as a collective whole, starting with a shared training experience and common language. This creates bond-ing in officers to stay. (5) Training makes for more competent, proficient and professional workers. This creates more satisfied and prideful employees. (6) Training helps deliver better services. This reduces complaints and attracts compliments. (7) Training enhances commitments in two ways. First, train-ing fosters personal commitment to corporate identity, values and missions. Second, training acts as a sunk cost for officers (p. 15).
Traditionally, HKP recruit training focusses on foot drill, law, proce-dure, weapons and physical development. There was little focus on human relations. In 1982, social studies was introduced. But the utility and impact of recruit training have neither been studied nor empirically validated.
Finally, the study group report informs about the need for and impact of HKP training reform, the main focus of the dissertation. The disserta-tion addressed two issues principally48: What are the needs for social studies training with the HKP recruits? What are the benefits with social studies training at Police Training School? The authors addressed two research ques-tions with two surveys�Xone with new recruits at PTS (RPC) (80/248 or 30%) and the other with in-service trainees at Regional Continuation Training (RCT) (340/2200 or 10%). The surveys were conducted in May 1994 with 100% response rates (p. 5). The surveys show that both RPC and RCT found social studies relevant and useful with their work. RPC considered social studies training to be ��good�� while the RCT considered it to be ��satisfactory��. Both groups thought that such courses should be taught by social workers and with the use of current issue cases of the police (p. 7).
A cursory review of the HKP literature before 2000 shows that there were fewer than 30 journal articles and book chapters on HKP and policing in Hong Kong. There does not appear to be any major focus, well-developed theme or building on each other��s work. There is also little attempt to develop theory or to use empirical evidence to support findings, most of which are based on secondary materials. A careful reading of the entire research output shows that few references were made to the Chinese literature, except per-haps Chinese guanxi management in corruption and integrative function of Guan Di worship in policing.49
Academic Books and Monographs
The few academic books that were available before 2000 were very much historical in nature and descriptive in kind (e.g., I. Ward, The Hong Kong Marine Police: 1841�V1950 (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1991). A few of them were written for lay readers, for example, R. Wacks, Police Powers in Hong Kong: Problems and Prospect (Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law, 1989).
The Hong Kong Law Reform Commission published a number of well-researched, systematic, comprehensive, comparative, authoritative reports, including Report on Confession and Their Admissibility in Criminal Proceedings, Topic 8 (14 December 1984); Report on Bail in Criminal Proceeding, Topic 16 (December 1988); Report on Loitering, Topic 23 (May 1990); and Report on Arrest, Topic 25 (1992). But they all suffered from being too focussed and unduly legalistic. They were not informed by social science research. None of the Law Reform Commission studies draw upon Chinese ideas and local culture.
There are a few scholarly investigations into police corruption, organ-ised crime and triads (e.g., R. Lee, Corruption and Its Control in Hong Kong (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 1981)). There are also a few law books on police powers and criminal procedures in Hong Kong,.for.example, G..Heilbronn, Police powers: Arrest, detention, and seizure, Criminal Procedure in Hong Kong, 3rd Edition (1998).
Textbooks
Currently, there is no police textbook in Hong Kong. The closest ones are the following: K. C. Wong��s Policing in Hong Kong (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2012); One Country Two Systems: A Case Study of Cross-Border Crime between Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and People��s Republic of China (Brunswick, NJ: Transactions Publications, 2012) (a case study of how the ��Big Boss�� case was handled by the HKP); Cyberspace Governance in China (New York: Nova Scientific Publication, 2012) (includ-ing ��Cyberspace Governance in China in Hong Kong��) and Jiao��s The Police in Hong Kong (University Press of America, 2007).
Starting in the 2000s, instruction materials on criminal justice policing started to appear. Before 2000, the first comprehensive text on Hong Kong criminal justice was an edited volume (Introduction to the Hong Kong Criminal Justice System [Hong Kong: HKU Press, 1994]) by Mark S. Gaylord and Harold Traver, two leading Hong Kong criminal justice scholars of the time.
It is a short book (180 pages) with an extensive coverage but average treatment of the subject. It reviews 13 aspects of the Hong Kong criminal jus-tice system, including the HKP, with an appendix on ��Hong Kong��s Principal Criminal Ordinances and Common Law Offences�� (184�V192).
The foreword is written by Louise I. Shelley (��it provides a useful frame-work for subsequent comparative analysis��, the authors provide an overview of the Hong Kong criminal justice system anchor within a historical context.). The book contains 13 chapters: Chapters 1 to 13 are titled ��The Hong Kong Criminal Justice System��, ��The Measurement of Crime��, ��The Royal Hong Kong Police��, ��The Customs and Excise Department��, ��The Independent Commission against Corruption��, ��Criminal Law��, ��The Prosecutions Division of the Legal Department��, ��Legal Assistance��, ��The Judiciary��, ��The Court Interpreters�� Office��, ��The Correctional Services Department��, ��The Social Welfare Department�� and ��The Basic Law��, respectively. As a first venture in the field, the book was an invaluable contribution to fill a void. While the book serves its essential func-tion in providing the readers a brief overview of the Hong Kong criminal justice system, it does little else. Like many academic books on Hong Kong criminal justice and policing at the time, it is not a scholarly research book if scholarly research means that it is based on systematic literature review, clearly articu-lated research question, precisely postulated thesis, specific scientific method of inquiry, well-grounded theories, valid and reliable data, with critical analy-sis and portable findings. Additionally, it raised more questions than answers.
To be more specific, the major shortcomings and limitations of the book are three. First, it takes for granted the relevancy and applicability of foreign (Western) criminological materials to Hong Kong,50 an issue that is still very much alive today. Second, it is not based on empirical research, as there were few available data at that time. Since the situation has improved much, since then, a lot more needs to be done. Third, it is more about how Hong Kong criminal justice system functions in the book, rather than whether or not and how things work in the street. This critique still holds true today. As observed in a critical review by Janice Brabyn:
The truth is we know almost nothing about what actually goes on in the minds of Hong Kong police officers or in Hong Kong police stations or police vehi-cles, or during street-comer encounters between Hong Kong police and civil-ians, or indeed about most aspects of police practice. The other uniformed services have also largely escaped public scrutiny let alone detailed research. Surely we need to know a great deal about these things so that we can design our own Police and Criminal Evidence Ordinance (PACO), one which at least has a fighting chance of actually achieving some of the due process goals they are intended to serve�K.51
In short, the book is intended for novices and students. It can best be used as a barometer of the state of collective knowledge of Hong Kong crimi-nal justice, including policing as an emerging study field. Read reflectively and discerningly, it also provides ideas, raises issues and suggests a road map for future inquiry. For a pioneering book, this is no small achievement.
Introduction to the Hong Kong Criminal Justice blazed the way for others to come. It was followed by C. Jones, Criminal Justice in Hong Kong (Routledge�VCavendish, 2007), M. S. Gaylord, D. Gittings and H. Traver (eds.), Introduction to Crime, Law and Justice in Hong Kong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2007) and W. H. Chiu and T. W. Lo, Understanding Criminal Justice in Hong Kong (UK: Willan Publishing, 2008).52 Other than Professor Jones�� book, these books are more instruc-tional than investigative.53
Finally, if one is interested in researching into the HKP, one should begin by consulting the comprehensive list of the Hong Kong police literature com-piled in L. Siu-Kai, W. Po-san and S. Kwok-cheung, Hong Kong Politics: A Bibliography (Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Asia Pacific Studies, Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1999). Though a bit dated, it remains an important bibliography.
The other compilation of source materials is: Policing in the Turbulent Hong Kong: 1940�X1960s: Witnessed by Frontline Police Officers.54
Popular Readings55
There are also a number of popular books written by retired police offi-cers. They are locker-room chats and personal anecdotal accounts of how police work is done. They are about police officers�� daily encounters and life-long experiences. Together, they tell us about HKP organisational prac-tices, police personality and culture. Some noteworthy works include CIP Kenneth Andrew��s Hong Kong Detective (London: John Long Ltd., 1962); Anthony Annieson��s The One-Eyed Dragon: The Inside Story of a Hong Kong Policeman (Moffat, Scotland: Lochar Publishing, 1989); Lau Kai Fat��s (�B�Ҫk) (1932�V2007) ĵ�ɹ��� [Inside Police Stations] (�կq, 1991); �`�����O, [Footprints of Chief Inspector of Police] (�կq, 1990); �`����W�a�ɮ� [Personal Files from Chief Inspector of Police] (�կq, 1991); and �`����^�п� [Memoirs of Chief Inspector of Police] 5 Vol. (�~�E..�X��, 1991/93).
Of these gems, Lau Kai Fat��s series of ��police story�� books stands out as the most representative. Lau Kai Fat served with HKP for 35 years, from 1952 to the 1990s, in various postings, branches and districts, and on a variety of assignments. He retired as a CIP.
Kelvin Wong (���_��) published ĵ�x��O�X���Q�~�N����ĵ������l [Footprints of a Police Officer�XHong Kong Police Force in the 60��s] (����T�p�ѩ�, 2008). The book is about the experiences of the author, who worked as an Inspector of Police in HKP from 1963 to 1971, after having worked as an accountant for five years.
Lui Kei��s (�f�_) �ڪ�ĵ��ͲP [My Life as a Policeman] (�վǥX����, 2008) documents the journey of the author, starting as a juvenile delinquent and overcoming the odds to become a police officer, from police training in PCS/PTS to a life-long police career until 2008.
Mike Smith��s In the Shadow of the Noonday Gun (Windsor, 24 January 2013) is a collection of 16 police stories. The stories tell us how policing is done in Hong Kong, behind the scenes, from an expatriate��s perspective. Smith worked for the HKP for five years and intended to tell all: ��The Noonday Gun is really a play on the ��shadow�� part�KTo me the gun represents Hong Kong��s establishment. I��m trying to tell human stories in the shadows of the estab-lishment�Xthe other side, as it were��.56
With the advent of the Internet and the World Wide Web, people can gain free access to the HKP��s official newspaper, the OffBeat,57 police blogs, for example, SIP Ling,58 websites, for example, Hong Kong Police Club,59 Gwulo; Old Hong Kong�VRoyal Hong Kong Police,60 and HKP officers�� blog entries; for example, on 8 August 2009, a former HKP officer (1995�V2009), pen named Water, posted an article on the web titled ��Are You Suitable to Be a Police Officer?��61 The lengthy article related his short career as a PC with the HKP. His message to young people who aspire to join the HKP is not to join the HKP if they have other choices. The article related his experience working in the HKP for 10 plus years. It was meant to be an expose of sorts; to inform the public of what it is like to work for the HKP in the hope that young people will think twice before join-ing the HKP. As intended, the carry-away lesson is that the HKP is not what it appears and working for the HKP is not what it is made out to be:
HKP is most certainly not a career for everyone. While the pay and benefits are fairly good to start with, it is also a demanding job�Xphysically, emotion-ally and morally, and dead-end job. More importantly, in order to negotiate, survive and/or prosper in the HKP system, police constables must be prepared to sacrifice ones integrity, ethics and dignity. This includes kissing up to the boss and dressing down by the public, and subjecting to criminal prosecution and civil liability when things go wrong.62
Newspapers, English and Chinese, are also printing police columns, for example, Senior Superintendent (Retired) Lam��s column, relating his 32 years of experience working in the HKP.63 Investigative reporting in Hong Kong also provides lurid details of police misconducts, for example:
�E
Former PC Wong Chi-ho (36)64 was charged with 9 counts of indecent assault on female students, aged 10�V11, in a Wong Po primary school where he worked as an audio technician, in between October 2005 and January 2006. According to prosecution at the Kowloon City Magistrate, the defendant approached the students at recess from the back and grabbed the kid��s hand to touch his penis. The kids reported this to their parents. The defendant was arrested. He was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 20 months (DCCC 665/2006).65

�E
On 4 September 2004, Wong was working at the Police Training School, recruitment section. He was found hiding in one of the female toilet cubicles. When confronted, Wong told the female offi-cer that he entered the toilet by mistake in an urgent call of nature. He was placed on probation (ESCC 4648/04).

�E
The records show that the defendant had two prior sex-related crimi-nal records. In 2004, Wong was found coming out of Wanchai Police Quarter, after having locked himself in a cubicle. He was put on pro-bation for loitering (KCCC 4281/06).66


The more substantial and research-based popular reading on the HKP are: K. Sinclair, Asia��s Finest: An Illustrated Account of the Royal Hong Kong Police (Hong Kong: Unicorn, 1983), which is an illustrated story of 150 years of the HKP. It was followed by L. Sinclair and N. K. Ng, Asia��s Finest Marches On: Policing Hong Kong from 1841 into the 21st Century (Hong Kong: Kevin Sinclair Associates, 2009), which brings the original ��Asia��s Finest�� up to date.
An official version of HKP history recently appeared on the HKP web-site: HKP Staff (2012). Police History: History�XThe First Century (ĵ..�v�G.�v-�ij�.���ʦ~��. ����ĵ..) (in Chinese [simplified and traditional Han] and English), Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.67 It was also accompanied by other interesting topics: ��The Modern Era: 1945�V67��, ��Creating a Legend: 1967�V94��, ��Changes to the Policing Model and the Return of Sovereignty 1994�V94��, ��The New Century��, ��Women�XAn Equal Force��, ��Ballistics & Sciences�� and ��Down Memory Lane��. Besides being an easily accessible source of information on the HKP, past and present, such an institutional history tells a lot about how the HKP looks at itself, from periodisation to issues of note to trial and tribulation. In this regard, as a discerning HKP observer, it matters less what the HKP said of itself, true or false. It matters why and how it presented itself the way it did.
The latest entry of this kind of writing is that of L. Ho and Y. K. Chu, Policing Hong Kong, 1842�V1969: Insiders�� Stories (Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press, 2011), which contains a lot of facts about the HKP, from history to police jargons, with substantial contributions from old timers. One of the distinguished features of this book is that it uses a lot of Chinese sources, of varying degrees of validity and reliability, as the authors read-ily concede, and in some cases make allowance for.68 The other interesting feature is that the book takes time to explain the origin of some of the police jargons that have a long history and are culturally rich, for example, ��cha ren�� (official runner) or ��green coat�� (police officer).69
Another source of popular readings is those written by people, local or foreign, who have lived under, experienced with or have had exposure to the HKP. These include the following:
Patrick Shuk-siu Yu (�E����), a famous Crown Counsel from Hong Kong who specialised in criminal cases from Hong Kong,70 shared with us his experience of working as a Police Reserve in Hong Kong in his memoir Tales from No. 9 Ice House Street (2002).71 In January 1953, Yu joined the HKP as a Police Reserve constable at Cai Wan. He was mentored by a sub-inspector from his old high school Wah Yan College. On their rounds of patrol duties, they ran into open drug markets, gambling establishments and prostitution brothels.
The sub-inspector was naturally more than embarrassed, �K ��Barrister Yu,�� he said ��you will have to get used to certain unpleasant facts which individual officers like me can do nothing to change. To save our skin, we have to learn to hear no evil, see no evil, and speak no evil. As a member of the Police Reserve and a lawyer, you may be able to do something about it, but we regulars are less fortunate���K72
This frank exchange between a serving HKP inspector and a part-time Police Reserve allows one to understand how the HKP works in practice and in real terms, away from self-promotion and subjective bias.
Elsie Tu,73 a long-time Hong Kong resident and social activist, revealed how the HKP behave against the less fortunate. She shares her run-in with the HKP as part of her client advocacy and public service in her book Colonial Hong Kong in the Eyes of Elsie Tu:
I dealt with numerous complaints from the public, and it was cleared that most unwarranted arrests were made near the end of the month, confirming the belief that officers had to show a good detection rate in their monthly report�Kunwarranted arrest were often teenagers, or men rather poorly dressed or poorly education, and, worst of all, mentally handicapped persons.74
There are books about people who encounter the HKP on a daily basis as part of their life course, that is, lower class or marginalised people. Such lit-erature is best exemplified by G. Mathews, Ghetto at the Center of the World: Chungking Mansions, Hong Kong (2012).75 This book informs that the HKP exercise their legal authority sparingly and judiciously, lest they disturb the settled expectations of the people dependent on the police for survival, for example, illegal immigrants and suppliers of illicit service or products.
The literature also includes those people who were arrested by the HKP officers. Andrew Bailey was an American. He was arrested by the HKP for money laundering at the Hong Kong International Airport. He writes about his experience in Hell in Hong Kong: 134 Days of Torture (2012) in vivid detail that only people who have first-hand experience can offer.76
People who grow up and live in a police family household offer us an inside look at HKP officers away from the office and speaking from their hearts. P. Craggs��s When Harry Met Vicky�XA Fatal Attraction: Growing Up with My Parents (2012)77 tells us how it is like growing up in a British HKP officer��s household. This book tells a story of a cross-cultural marriage between a Chinese refugee and a famous HKP inspector (1959�V1971) that ended in a tragic in-family murder.
The book describes how it is like, from the son��s perspective, to live a fam-ily life, on the edge of the cultural boundary. With raw emotion and biting gossips fully on display for all to see, Craggs presents a behind-closed-doors account of a tightknit police community. Craggs offers a personal glimpse and intimate look at Inspector Craggs on and off the job from negotiat-ing promotion and coming to terms with corruption, to family happenings and social gatherings ��Family Life and the 1960s Era�� (p. 79). For example, Inspector Craggs once regretted accepting pocket changes as a traffic officer. His wife felt differently, however, telling her son: ��Your father was a stupid fool. Everyone was doing it and even for more money�� (p. 80). Even worse, Craggs intimated that he was denied promotion and shifted from station to station (four times) because he was not on the take. He took to binge drink-ing and became an alcoholic. Inspector ��Happy Harry�� no more:
From the moment that I was born in 1959 up until his death in 1971�Khe had been moved from each division and area of his police work four times. Whether it was his request or that he was ordered to move is unclear, but the effect on my mother and us as children was quite establishing�KBy 1967, he had been an inspector now for fifteen years, and to see other colleagues getting to at least senior inspector or chief inspector must��ve demoralized him. His drinking now had made him into an alcoholic�KHe told my mother that the local constables were muke tau (wooden-headed), meaning that they were basically useless and had no guts or initiative in dealing with that situation. Of course he was seeing through his British eyes and did not understand that Chinese were not on the whole confrontational people, or that they believe confrontation can offer a solution. It was indicative that my father��s impres-sion of the Chinese in general was similar to that of the old colonialists of the earlier period of the British Empire, seeing and treating them in a rather patronizing and dismissive way, labeling them as ��yellow��, meaning that they lacked a certain amount of chivalry and courage.
The book ends with a lengthy discussion of the murder of Inspector Craggs by Vicky, his wife. The trial ended with an acquittal.78
There are still those pieces of literature that look at the HKP79 through the eyes of people who work for the organisation, not in the capacity of a police officer but as that of migrants, such as C. Knowles and D. Harper, Hong Kong: Migrant Lives, Landscapes, and Journeys (University of Chicago Press, 15 December 2009).80 This line of scholarship informs what these indi-viduals feel and think as a working foreigner in Hong Kong.
All of the above-mentioned popular books and e-sources make for infor-mative and interesting reading on the HKP. While all of them claim to be accurate accounts of the HKP, none of them pretend to be scholarly work, in theory, method or findings. But from the perspective of the target audience, the general public who are interested in the lores and adventures of HKP, the series promises to be both enlightening and entertaining. As intended, they are successful in projecting a larger-than-life image of the HKP, making it an integral part of Hong Kong��s collective memory and popular culture.
The more scholarly but still easily accessible The Other Hong Kong Reports (now defunct) has chapters on the HKP that offer the general public a differ-ent and critical view of the HKP from the ��public�� perspective.81
NGO Reports
Finally, Hong Kong NGOs, from human rights groups (Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor82 and Hong Kong Human Rights Watch83) to lawyers�� asso-ciations (Hong Kong Bar Association84 and Hong Kong Law Society), often compile extensive accountability reports and timely press releases on police activities and issues,85 with clear political stances, for example, Hong Kong Bar Association on the left and Hong Kong Law Society on the right. The Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor is more indigenous86 and the Hong Kong Human Rights Watch is more foreign. Both promote universal rights over collective welfare and individual freedom over police powers. Individual LegCo members�� press releases or issue reports also make for good reading on policing87 (e.g., those from Margaret Ng for liberal accounts and those from Raymond Wong for a more radical spin.
III: Studying Policing in Hong Kong: Problems and Issues
There are a number of reasons accounting for this lack of scholarly interest in the investigation of policing in Hong Kong:
First, there is a pecking order within the Hong Kong academic world. Police studies have been marginalised, both as a subject matter of study and focus area of research. There is a common perception among the scholars in Hong Kong that police institution and the practice is not worth studying. This means two things. First, the studying of police work is considered not intellectually as stimulating, that is, it is theoretically not interesting and empirically mundane. Second, there is not much to study about the police, that is, rhetorically, what is there to study but how to detect crime and arrest people? In support of the above observation and as an example, in the late 1990s, this author was asked by one senior academic at a leading Hong Kong university in a most paternalistic and patronising way (all well intended) as to why this author, as a lawyer by profession and with a social science back-ground, did not put his ��talent�� and ��energy�� to work to pursue more main-stream research, for example, law or politics. The subject the senior scholar had in mind is the study of law in China historically and sociologically, a matter of great interest to him. The senior scholar concluded by saying: ��You should be teaching lawyers, not police officers��. On another occasion when this author talked to another senior scholar-administrator about his plan to help in developing course materials for a Hong Kong police studies pro-gramme in another higher education unit, the administrator informed the author that such activities are not counted as ��academic�� research for the purpose of assessment and evaluation and it might not be time well spent. The message is as clear as it is frustrating: scholars should be directing their research effort in conducting ��real�� research, not police studies.
The author mentions both stories not because he thinks ill of his col-leagues or they are necessarily wrong, but because they tell of a discrimi-natory mindset. The fact that these scholars are speaking from the bottom of their heart and not the top of the head made their comments all the more revealing and disconcerting, as they reflected and reinforced the intellectual climate in Hong Kong. It does not bode well for Hong Kong police studies development. The lesson one can draw from both of these respected scholars and powerful administrators is that scholars in Hong Kong hold a dim view of police studies and low regard for police scholars. Together, these two persons have 60 years of experience in Hong Kong aca-demia. Their views and opinions, though they may not be representative of or shared by all others in Hong Kong (particularly the new comers), are authoritative in shaping the academic environment in Hong Kong, and thus deserve attention. This is a problem scholars have to deal with in mounting police research in Hong Kong.
For some, the above put-down of a rising discipline by another can be dismissed as ��trash talk�� in the politics of higher education. Still, talk has consequences, to put down others in promoting self is evidence of close--mindedness.88 In order to elevate one��s importance, as administrator (��I know more than you do in this business��) or scholar (��I am more distinguished than you ever can��), one needs to stand on the bodies of others. The pollution of academic environment through denigration needs to be reckoned with, lest the local police scholars suffered from discrimination, affecting their sense of self-identity and progress of professional advancement.
Second, before 2000, from the HKP��s perspective, policing is a voca-tion.89 It is a craft, not a science. Thus, to learn about the police, it is best to join the police. Police work can best be learnt through practice, not scientif-ically-based research.90 While there is a shift of emphasis within the HKP to promote continuous education and a lifelong learning culture, as reflected by many senior officers having or pursuing graduate degrees, for example, in 2011, there were two assistant commissioners of police (ACP) with Ph.D. and one ACP pursuing Ph.D. (graduate), education does not assure promotion, and may even be a liability.91
Third, the HKP resists any attempt to study their organisation and oper-ations, especially by outsiders. The HKP is afraid that this might penetrate their mystique. If the public knew more about how policing really worked, this might compromise their operational effectiveness, professional auton-omy and political legitimacy.92 This view still holds, in spite of a more liberal stance towards scientific study of the HKP. This is to say, there is a need to be careful about the competing demands of good intent to open up the HKP and zealous effort in protecting HKP secrets.
Gathering data for Hong Kong police research is also difficult for the following reasons:
First, the HKP is fearful of sharing information with outsiders for a num-ber of reasons. As an organisation, the HKP is subjected to political account-ability and, increasingly, exposed to public scrutiny. The HKP is genuinely fearful of how information will be interpreted (when taken out of context) and used (when being exploited). Thus, it follows that the less the public knows the better. In this regard, a very senior HKP officer has confided in this author that, in his opinion, one of the problems with police�Vcitizen rela-tionship today is that the people know too much and the police are sharing too much information.93
Second, the HKP as a result of its mission (as defender of law and order) and because of its ideology (as promoter of ethics and morality) is a con-servative organisation. Consequently, the HKP does not accept alien ideas instantaneously. Researchers asking novel questions and introducing new perspectives are immediately suspected. In and around the HKP, they are considered as ��juveniles�� (young kids having problems), a derogatory refer-ence that speaks to a deeply held attitude towards outsiders and academics.
Third, as required by the job, the police officers need to be in control of a situation and not allow it to get out of hand. The police have learnt that once information is released to the public they lose all control over how informa-tion is being used. Releasing information is a risky business.
Fourth, the HKP is concerned with possibly compromising operational secrecy. There is a need to keep organisational and operational secrets from the public, for example, information source, law enforcement priorities and police tactics.94
Fifth, the HKP is much concerned with protecting individual privacy. In as much as information the police acquired are dedicated for law enforcement purposes, others using the information could potentially create a breach of confidence scenario.
In practice, serving police officers must apply for permission from the commissioner of police on a case-by-case basis when conducting research into the HKP. The application must cover the purpose, scope, method and use of research. Finally, a copy of the research report and findings must be cleared by the HKP headquarter of all objectionable materials before final distribution or publication. Sometimes, restricted circulation is man-dated. It goes without saying that both as a researcher and as a research subject, a police officer is required to abide by the official secrecy pledge at all times.
As the change of police culture within the HKP takes root, the HKP top leadership��s attitude and organisation culture towards research is slowly changing. Increasingly, the HKP is opening its doors for researchers.95 Even then, the opening is not total. As recent as 2006, SIP Chan had problems get-ting data from the HKP:
Although data, figures and previous analysis in relation to the concerned recruitment system are rather adequate and readily available, there is infor-mation being withheld by Personnel Wing of the Police Force that the author considers as relevant to this research. Personnel Wing has clearly indicated those information is within the ambit of confidentiality and relates to the Police Force��s internal policy, which should not be disclosed to assist an aca-demic research.96
This author has also personally experienced denial of information requests, in his research into police handling of the ��Big Boss�� case in 2000.97
IV: Conclusion
This chapter investigates the historical development of police studies in Hong Kong, as an education and research field. Investigation into the HKP suffers from the usual problems of lack of source materials, scholarly interests and intellectual capacity. As a result, not much has been written on the HKP,98 still less on policing in Hong Kong.99 Given the storied history of Hong Kong as a colony and importance of the HKP on colonial administration (1941�V1997), it is surprising that there is such little interest and effort to explore the HKP��s political role in colonial administration and document its social impact on Hong Kong development. It is doubly strange that policing in Hong Kong has never been studied from a Hong Kong�VChinese and cultural perspective, for example, in what way and how can it be said that policing in Hong Kong is Hong Kong�VChinese policing? What does policing with Hong Kong charac-teristic mean? In what way and to what extent is the HKP affected by Hong Kong100 versus Chinese101 versus Western culture102?
As to a perspective, historiography is about discovering and interpreta-tion of obscured and scattered facts, not the rendering of a monolithic ethno-centric reality, still less Eurocentric one. Thus far, the history of the HKP can be described as story-telling by colonialists (the privileged), elites (the rich) and learned (intellectuals), with a legal focus, a political analysis framework and top-down perspective. More specifically, the study of HKP history has been focussed on the HKP as a law and order institution. The framework is one of colonialisms. The perspective is from the top down (HK government), outside (scholars) and afar (England). Seldom are the voices of the people of Hong Kong on policing taken into account;103 nor are there any HKP history built upon the testimonials104 on frontline (Chinese) officers.105 An institu-tional history of the HKP written from the above by the administration, and afar by Western elites and aloof with ��pure�� scientism has little hope of cap-turing the ��Spirit of the Age�� or Zeitgeist. Viewed in this way, HKP history is a biased, distorted and constructed/interpretative narrative about rulers and the ruled and corruption and progress rather than what the Hong Kong people experienced, perceived and received of their police, as lived.
Finally, in investigating into the HKP, there is a need to draw a clear distinction between studying the HKP as a political instrument of control or suppression versus social institution to provide order or deliver service. For the first 160 years (1844�V2004), the HKP knew the first, not the second, from the Hong Kong government��s, British Parliament��s or Hong Kong people��s perspective. It is high time to see the HKP and policing in Hong Kong in its natural light.
In concluding this review, it is observed that, since the earliest time, there are two realities to policing in Hong Kong, with British colonialists at the top and Chinese subjects at the bottom, resulting in a ��dual track�� colonial policing versus people��s policing system. After 1997, the duality in policing still persists, this time with professional policing up top and street policing at the bottom. The observation to be noted is that on all sides there is ample knowledge about colonial policing and professional policing but little about people��s policing and street policing.106 Such a knowledge gap can be nar-rowed with ��inside out and bottom up research��. One of the contributions of this book is to demystify colonial policing and current professional HKP reform, making it clear that the duality of policing, from colonial versus local, to professional versus street policing, is here to stay.
Endnotes
1. F. Morn, Academic Politics and the History of Criminal Justice Education (Wesport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1995).
2. The problem is not unique to policing education. As a practising lawyer once, the author has engaged in many professional discussions over whether the knowledge of law and skills of lawyering can be best taught in school or at work. The same can be said of all street-level bureaucrats, for example, social work-ers, or service agents, for example, nurses. To do justice to this observation, we need to delineate the issues on hand. What is the nature and characteristics of the problem on hand and focus and scope of the issues being debated? Very few people would argue that the philosophy of law or theory of policing could (fea-sibility issue) and should (desirability) be researched and taught only in school (formal education) without input from the street. However, many readily accept the idea that the practice of law or art of policing can be learned in school, by way of clinical education (with legal internship or from police war stories) or simulation (mock trial for lawyer, table top exercise on terrorism). The current approach is a hybrid one: having experienced lawyers using case study to get law students to think like a lawyer; or, for a police instructor, using experiences to train police through role playing and tactical rehearsals.
3. J.-P. Brodeur, Police studies past and present: A reaction to the articles pre-sented by T. Feltes, L. T. Hoover, P. K. Manning, and K. Wong, Police Quarterly, 8: 44�V56, 2005.
4. The author, K. C. Wong, is a founding member of IPES (International Police Executive Symposium), which tries to bring police practitioners and policing scholars together, in sharing knowledge, advancing understanding and facilitat-ing collaboration.
5. Practitioner scholar refers to practitioner-turned scholar or practitioner who engages in scholarly research. Scholar practitioner refers to scholars becoming cops.
6. Kam C. Wong, The Study of Policing in Hong Kong (2005), in progress. Chapter Three: Inside Out�VBottom Up. (Draft manuscript on file with author).
7. Academic study of sociology was introduced in Hong Kong in the 1950s and approached ��take-off�� stage in the 1960s, with the establishment of Hong Kong Sociological Society (1966), Department of Sociology at Hong Kong University (1967) and integration of sociology programmes at Chung Chi College (1951), United College (1956) and New Asia College (1959) at Chinese University of Hong Kong under one roof as the new Department of Sociology (1963). R. P.L. Lee and S.K. Lau, The Birth and Growth of Academic Sociology in Hong Kong. Occasional Paper Series. Hong Kong Studies, Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, CUHK (1993). http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/hkiaps/publica-tions/op/OP28-text.pdf. See also T. L. Lui, ��From being the other to becom-ing the local: Hong Kong��s sociological exploration��. The Workshop on Asian Sociology, Seoul, South Korea, 18 December 2010. http://hub.hku.hk/bit-stream/10722/138324/1/Content.pdf?accept=1
8. On 20 May 1858, Governor John Bowring appointed a Commission of Inquiry to investigate into Attorney General Anstey��s charges, sent directly to the Secretary of Colony. See ��Warrant of Commission��. J. W. Norton-Kyshe, The History of the Laws and Courts of Hongkong, Tracing Consular Jurisdiction in China and Japan and Including Parliamentary Debates, and the Rise, Progress and Successive Changes in the Various Public Institutions of the Colony from the Earliest Period to the Present Time, Vol. 1 (London: T. Fischer Unwin, 1898), p. 508.
9. T. C. Anstey, Crime and Government at Hong Kong, A Letter to the ��Times�� (1859) RareBooksClub.com (4 July 2012).
10. D. R. Caldwell, A Vindication of the Character of the Undersigned from the Aspersions of Mr. T. Chisholm Anstey, Ex-Attorney General of Hongkong as Contained in His Charges, His Pamphlet, and His Letter to the Secretary of State for the Colonies to the Secretary of State for the Colonies (Hong Kong, Noronha��s office, 1860).
11. See Chapter 6 Police Reform Literature, infra for details.
12. Minutes of meeting of the Panel on Security on 11 November 1996 (LC Paper No. CB(2) 1545/96-97). http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr96-97/english/panels/se/minutes/se111196.htm
13. Coopers and Lybrand, The Review of the Top Management Structure of the Royal Hong Kong Police: Final Report (London: Coopers & Lybrand, 1993).
14. Emphasis on discipline with a ��can do spirit�� and problem-oriented approach; life-time commitment with a strong sense of loyalty and ��esprit de corps��, strong rank consciousness, and formalized internal communication and control system.
15. Coopers and Lybrand, The Review of the Top Management Structure of the Royal Hong Kong Police: Final Report (London: Coopers & Lybrand, 1993), p. 71.
16. ��Less welcome are restatements by some authors of comparatively common-place Western criminological material with the implicit assumption that such material is relevant to the discussion of the Hong Kong criminal justice system��. 25 Hong Kong L.J., 429, 1995, 430. See information at Note 49.
17. Commission Lee Ming-kui (2003�V2007) was the first Chinese Commission with an undergraduate degree, though many senior officers were sent for higher professional education overseas.
18. The author, Kam C. Wong, resigned from the HKP to pursue policing studies, at the Department of Forensics, Indiana University (Bloomington) in 1972.
19. The author, Kam C. Wong, was a lecturer with the Department of Government and Public Administration, Chinese University of Hong Kong, and Acting Secretary of Chinese Law Program (1983�V1985).
20. The author, Kam C. Wong, was a steering member of the group. He was the then Acting Secretary of the Chinese Law Program at Chinese University of Hong Kong, and was intimately involved with the HKP scholars�� program.
21. The author, Kam C. Wong, was elected the vice chair in 1998 and served until 2001.
22. Hong Kong Society of Criminology. http://www.crime.hku.hk/hksoccrim.htm.
23. The author, Kam C. Wong, was one of its lead tutors.
24. The author, Kam C. Wong, acted as consultant, course developer and exter-nal examiner to Open University, Police and Society Program (October 2000�V2002); external examiner, Department of Sociology (Criminology), Hong Kong University (2001�V2004); adviser and reviewer to Chinese University of Hong Kong, Police Studies Project Proposal (June 1997).
25. K. Fang. Royal Hong Kong police, In: Antoinetter Burton (ed.), After the Imperial Turn: Thinking with the Through the Nation (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 8 May 2003), pp. 293�V307, 200.
26. The author served as an internal faculty adviser and consultant to this initiative.
27. Discussion with numerous HKP students at CUHK and HKU.
28. http://www.ppaweb.hku.hk/programmes/tpg/mpa Its graduates include Ms Lau Chi Wai, Edwina, Deputy Regional Command, HKP, 2001; Mr To Chun Wai, Clarence; Mr Au Chi Kwong, Sonny, ACPs, HKP, MPA 2006.
29. Opinion Survey: Full Time Masters in Criminology. Survey https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/embeddedform?formkey=dDFwNzhmWS1wRy0yMmcxc2JzN2J1Umc6MQ
30. Numerous discussions with Andrew Willis, Deputy Director of Scarman Center, University of Leicester, major provider of criminal justice distance learning instruction in Hong Kong, from 1998 to 1999.
31. K. C. Wong, Chinese Policing: History and Reform (New York: Peter Lang, 2009).
32. M. Brogden, The export of community policing�XBuyer beware, Proceeding Papers, Third AAPS Annual Conference (Hong Kong: AAPS, 29 July 2002), p. 20.
33. It is now commonly accepted as truism that economic condition, social struc-ture, family integrity and school education have more to do with the cause and prevention of deviance than any police intervention methods.
34. See K. C. Wong and G. Wong, Law and order in cyberspace: A case study of cyberspace governance and Internet regulation in PRC, Proceeding Papers, Third AAPS Annual Conference (Hong Kong: AAPS, 29 July 2002). For an example of one such approach, see K. C. Wong, The philosophy of community policing in China, Police Quarterly, 4 (2): 186�V214, 2001. (��It finds that the Chinese philoso-phy on community policing differs substantially from that of the U.S.��.)
35. M. L. Birzer, Writing partnership between police practitioners and researchers, Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, 3 (2): 149�V156, 2003.
36. This gem of a scholarship is exemplified by the pioneer work of M. Ng-Quinn, Bureaucratic Response to Political Change: Theoretical Use of Atypical Case of the Hong Kong Police (Hong Kong: Occasional Paper No. 2, Hong Kong Institute of Asia Pacific Studies, Chinese University of Hong Kong). More recently, A. Y. Jiao, Organizational behaviors and political sensitivi-ties: Policing Hong Kong after 1997, Public Administration and Policy, 11 (1): 41�V60, 2002.
37. There is a continuous debate over the relative contribution to police scholarship between ��insider�� versus ��outsider�� research. (The ��insider�� vs. ��outsider�� dichot-omy does not do justice to the many other possibilities, e.g., ��insider-outside��, e.g., police officers turned police researchers, and ��outsider-insider��, e.g., scholars, turned police officers.) The contributions and limitations of ��insider�� to police research, particularly in the Hong Kong context, must be acknowledged. This is a ��forum issue�� for another day. In passing, while an ��insider�� brings with him/her original data, first-hand experience, indigenous perspective, and inside-out perspective, he/she suffers from (charges of) a lack of objectivity resulting from institutional bias, from conflict of interests to a lack of vision.
38. This gem of scholarship is exemplified by the pioneering work of D. Y. K. Tsui, Problems of a Para-Military Police Force in a Changing Society�XA Case Study of the Royal Hong Kong Police Force (CUHK, 1979) and The Promotion System in the Officer Cadre of the Royal Hong Kong Police (HKU, 1982); More recently, C. Y. Cheuk, Community Policing in Hong Kong: An Institutional Analysis. DBA Thesis. Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 1999.