File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: ‘It was you who taught me that peaceful marches did not work’, Uncivil Disobedience and the Hong Kong Protests

Title‘It was you who taught me that peaceful marches did not work’, Uncivil Disobedience and the Hong Kong Protests
Authors
KeywordsHong Kong protests
civil disobedience
principled uncivil disobedience
duty to resist
graffiti
Issue Date2020
PublisherMartinus Nijhoff. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.brill.nl/m_catalogue_sub6_id18376.htm
Citation
Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law, 2020, v. 21 n. 1, p. 63-97 How to Cite?
AbstractHong Kong’s one country, two systems model denies meaningful political equality for citizens. Instead citizens have engaged government in dialogue and have been granted a foothold in politics through protest. However, this equilibrium was upset in 2019 to 2020. Protests took place that were unprecedented in their scale, duration, widespread support and participation. And yet, government refused to engage in any kind of dialogue or deliberative action. This refusal, along with the use of excessive force by police, provoked an unprecedented escalation from civil disobedience to principled uncivil disobedience. This article argues that the escalation of principled uncivil disobedience was not only justified, but satisfied a duty that citizens have to resist injustice. It relies on the legal and political theory of Candice Delmas, arguing that while citizens have a prima facie obligation to obey the law, where law or policy becomes unjust, citizens may have a duty to resist that injustice, even if it means breaking the law. To illustrate this point, one type of principled uncivil disobedience that has become prevalent – graffiti – is used as an analytical lens. Graffiti communicates protestors’ grievances and subverts authority by reclaiming the space. It is allegorical of both the movement and the city; just as the cityscape has been permanently altered by the protests, so too has Hong Kong been changed by this period of unrest.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/290579
ISSN
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.102

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRICHARDS, J-
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-02T05:44:15Z-
dc.date.available2020-11-02T05:44:15Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationAsia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law, 2020, v. 21 n. 1, p. 63-97-
dc.identifier.issn1388-1906-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/290579-
dc.description.abstractHong Kong’s one country, two systems model denies meaningful political equality for citizens. Instead citizens have engaged government in dialogue and have been granted a foothold in politics through protest. However, this equilibrium was upset in 2019 to 2020. Protests took place that were unprecedented in their scale, duration, widespread support and participation. And yet, government refused to engage in any kind of dialogue or deliberative action. This refusal, along with the use of excessive force by police, provoked an unprecedented escalation from civil disobedience to principled uncivil disobedience. This article argues that the escalation of principled uncivil disobedience was not only justified, but satisfied a duty that citizens have to resist injustice. It relies on the legal and political theory of Candice Delmas, arguing that while citizens have a prima facie obligation to obey the law, where law or policy becomes unjust, citizens may have a duty to resist that injustice, even if it means breaking the law. To illustrate this point, one type of principled uncivil disobedience that has become prevalent – graffiti – is used as an analytical lens. Graffiti communicates protestors’ grievances and subverts authority by reclaiming the space. It is allegorical of both the movement and the city; just as the cityscape has been permanently altered by the protests, so too has Hong Kong been changed by this period of unrest.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherMartinus Nijhoff. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.brill.nl/m_catalogue_sub6_id18376.htm-
dc.relation.ispartofAsia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law-
dc.subjectHong Kong protests-
dc.subjectcivil disobedience-
dc.subjectprincipled uncivil disobedience-
dc.subjectduty to resist-
dc.subjectgraffiti-
dc.title‘It was you who taught me that peaceful marches did not work’, Uncivil Disobedience and the Hong Kong Protests-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1163/15718158-02101004-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85093953090-
dc.identifier.hkuros317624-
dc.identifier.volume21-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage63-
dc.identifier.epage97-
dc.publisher.placeNetherlands-
dc.identifier.issnl1388-1906-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats