HIC Amens Revue 17/5 623/5-
Reprieve of Tsoi Kwok Cheong
During the past week, there have been 15 editorials on this issue. They appeared in the following papers:
Ming Pao (17.5.73, 18.5.73, 19.5.73)
Fai Po (17.5.73)
Kung Sheung Yat Po (17.5.73)
Tin Tin Yat Po (17.5.73)
Wah Kiu Yat Po (17.5.73)
Sing Tao Jih Pao (17.5.73)
Wah Kiu Man Po (17.5.73)
New Life Evening Post (17.5.73, 22.5.73)
Sing Tao Man Pao (17.5.73)
Truth Daily (18.5.73)
Hong Kong Times (1) (19.5.73)
(2) (19.5.73)
The papers unanimously opposed the decision by Britain to reprieve the convicted murderer, Tsoi Kwok Cheong because "the decision was made against the wish of the people of Hong Kong". The news was received by the majority with "shock and disappointment", they said.
In analysing the reason for Britain's decision, Wah Kiu Yat Po, Sing Tao Jih Pao and Wah Kiu Man Po (17.5.73) attributed it to her lack of understanding of Hong Kong's situation and problems. The papers emphasized that the British Government has failed to see how urgently Hong Kong needs the death penalty as a means to curb crime and how strongly the public advocates it.
Ming Pao (19.5.73) saw more than just a difference of opinion between Britain and Hong Kong on the question of capital punishment. It said that the reason for the decision was domestic policy of Britain and the present situation in Northern Ireland.
"In Ireland, the purpose of abolishing the death sentence is to save more lives and control unrest, while in Hong Kong, the same result is to be achieved by implementing death penalty. In other words, Hong Kong and Northern Ireland share the same goal but must attain it through opposite means. It is a pity that the British authorities failed to see this point. To them, the unrest in Northern Ireland is a big issue, and one homicide cases in Hong Kong means very little to them. They ignore the trivial case so as to deal with the important ones. It is just Hong Kong's bad luck to be involved in all this". The paper commented.
New Life Evening Post (22.5.73) observed that superficially, the reprieve was granted as a result of recommendations from the top level administrators of Britain, but as a matter of fact, they did so under the pressure of political and religious forces.
"If we take a look at the history of Britain, we will find that church leaders have on more than one occasion interfered with the Government's policies and actions", the paper pointed out.
Kung Sheung Yat Po (17.5.73) hoped that the Queen would not make similar decision in future and that her ministers would give more consideration to the opinion of the majority of the people of Hong Kong.
On the other hand, Sing Tao Jih Po, Wah Kiu Man Po, Sing Tao Man Pao (17.5.73), Ming Pao and Hong Kong Times (19.5.73) felt it important that the Hong Kong Government should assume more responsibility for reflecting public opinion in Hong Kong to the British Government to help them make the right decisions.
12.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.