Severo PortelaIf the Legislative Assembly members were only about establishing it as a space of free speech, no matter how spirited or spicy the exchanges between peers may sound in-house, should they be amplified outside through the essential work of a free press, we would take it as another ordinary Saussure day without any man biting a dog.
However, the heated rounds the nine legislators (mostly Chief Executive nominated or appointees) fired upon pro-democracy Sou Ka Hou went well-beyond fair political criticism, bordered on harassment and intimidation; in a word, it was ugly. But given the apparently orchestrated blitzkrieg against the directly-elected legislator, fresh from an infamous suspension, the Legislative Assembly will regret it as the day it put up a chorus to fry the New Macau Association’s Sulu Sou; and while doing the roast, the up-titled gang of nine severely denounced a particular pathos. We will select from the accusations, inconveniences, improprieties, as we see it, not least a discrepancy here or a slander there.
In short, the nine Legislative Assembly members joined voices to criticize Sulu Sou on his views and means by which he challenged the re-creation of a Municipal Affairs Bureau untainted by popular representation. Albeit, the real motive to smear Sou looks likely to originate from one of the copycat AL rules and procedures that allows for a last-minute proposal to amend the final draft of a law. While Sulu was away, the Legislative Assembly voted to replace the Municipal Affairs Bureau with the Public Security Police as the authority to notify whenever residents decide to exert their Right to Freedom of Assembly (Basic Law; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights).
Perhaps due to an understandable unease to trust the process of notification of demonstration and public assembly to the police authority that in the end may or may not give the go ahead for a political right, Sulu Sou tried to insert an amendment to upgrade the process to the political level: Chief Executive or its government. That is what and why the bell rang in the club of the gentlemen appointees.
Back to the floor, as we stated above, the roasting of Sulu Sou denounced a rather dangerous pathos not dissimilar to the one that inspired the retouching of the judiciary and legal system… the cause of so many shipwrecks.
If we care to notice the rationale that pervades the criticism which the nine meted out to pro-democracy legislator Sou Ka Hou, we find it was about democracy, yes, democracy, and parliamentary culture, yes, parliamentary.
Lao Ngai and Pang Chuan not only accused Sulu of breach of solemnity in the Nam Van Lakes House that still remembers how tolerant it was of foul-mouthed Fong (a nice gentleman, indeed) but tried also to link him rather inappropriately to putative pro-democracy pairs in the Legislative Council of a region they did not name as Hong Kong.
Veteran conservative in the local lingo, Kou Hoi In accused Sulu of abuse of the rules, theater, boastfulness, and to end strongly with a curious statement, “He uses democracy to cover up his absolutist ideas”.
Ma Chi Seng, who some like Vickers contend will be the one to take over as CE as the princeling of the last of the three historical families, went further to demonstrate that what Sulu does cannot be democracy because it is not based on truth, on facts, just slogans…so does not qualify as democracy.
Finally, Kou Hoi In found that those who are arrogant and uncompromising, who abuse their power, do not respect the rules… and do not have the qualities to be a democrat (forgive us the capitals but we are quoting here) CANNOT TALK ABOUT DEMOCRACY.
P.S.: Spooky and more.
No Comments