The 70s Bi-weekly group was instrumental in organising a series of Baodiao demonstrations in 1971 including those that took place on 20 February (二·二○示威), 10 April (四·一○示威), 4 May (五·四示威), 16 May (五·一
六示威) and 13 June (六·一三示威.)471 Archival evidence reveals that editors of
the 70s Bi-weekly often participated in the Baodiao demonstrations including the ones held on 13 August and 7 July. On both occasions, among those arrested at
least one of them was a 70s Bi-weekly editor.
On Saturday 10 April 1971, approximately 30 to 40 people, many of whom were tertiary students participated in a demonstration in front of the Japanese Cultural Centre at the Junction of D‘Aguilar Street and Queen‘s Road
Central. The demonstration was organised neither by the HKFS nor the 70s Bi-
weekly. The Deputy President of the HKFS, Kwan Pun-fong, said at the time that
the HKFS had not sponsored the demonstration.472 According to Ng Chung-yin,
the demonstration was organised by a committee, which consisted of an editor of the 70s Bi-weekly, students from various schools and colleges such as Chu Hai College, King‘s College, and the New Asia College of the CUHK, and two
471 Wu, Dazhi weijing, pp.249-271
472South China Morning Post, 12 April 1971. This article was found in the Chinese Press
165
working young people.473 According to the Chinese-language press before the
demonstration started about 200 police officers were already stationed at the scene. From the point of view of the authorities, the demonstration was illegal, and in fact the police had denied a request by Mok Chiu-yu to hold a demonstration on 10 April. However, Mok was not a member of the group that
organised the 10 April demonstration.474 The incident was widely reported by the
press. In addition, an article in the Chinese University student magazine, written
by Chen Dong (陳東), a participant in the demonstration, gives a first-hand
account of what happened during the event. According to Chen, who was marching at the front, as the demonstrators were approaching the Japanese
Cultural Centre the police intervened.475 Twenty-one people, nineteen males and
two females, with two as young as sixteen, were arrested by the police and charged with unlawful assembly. Among the 21 arrested were students from the
HKU and CUHK, an editor of the Ming Pao Weekly magazine, a shipyard
mechanic, a ballroom waiter, a clerk, a female artist, and Ng Chung-yin of the
70s Bi-weekly.476
May Fourth is a national holiday in China, celebrating a famous 1919 student demonstration against Japanese imperialism. However, in Hong Kong in 1971 the participants included both students and non-students such as workers. On 4 May, a small demonstration was held in the Queen‘s Pier area by a group of
473
Wu, Dazhi weijing, pp.802-812.
474Ibid. 475
Chen Dong陳東, ‗Fenghou haixiao yi guyuan‘ (風吼海嘯憶故園), Zhongda xueshengbao (中
大學生報Official magazine of the Chinese University Student Union), special issue, 17 April 1971, p.2.
476South China Morning Post, 14 April 1971, Chinese Press Review, 15 April 1971, HKRS 70-2-
166
twelve young people. Some of the demonstrators were carrying banners. The
group arrived at 2:30 pm ‗to protest Japanese claims to the Senkaku Islands‘.477
After repeated warnings to disperse were ignored by the demonstrators they were arrested by the police and charged with unlawful assembly, for the
‗demonstration was held without the necessary police permit being obtained‘.478
The police report dated 4 May 1971 reveals that, among the twelve people arrested, while all were under the age of 30, only one person was a student, and
the others were workers.479 Of the twelve arrested, three were editors of the 70s
Bi-weekly. They were Chan Ching-wai (陳清偉), Mok Chiu-yu (莫昭如), and
Sze Shun-tun (施純頓).
The above incidents show that the 70s Bi-weekly was in the forefront of
the Baodiao campaign as they attempted to promote its anti-colonial, anti- capitalist agenda through the campaign. The incidents also show how local young adults were an increasingly important factor in the nationalist movements in Hong Kong. However, the incidents examined above were only a prelude, for there would be a much larger, violent confrontation between police and the young protesters on 7 July.
The 7 July demonstration was a turning point in that it marked a change
in the nature of the Baodiao campaign. The events at the 7 July demonstration
further contributed to the anti-colonial rhetoric of the New Left because Hong
477Police Report No.14, 4 May 1971, HKRS 70-2-324. 478Ibid.
479Ibid. The name ‗Mok Chiu-yu‘ appears in the police report twice, one classified as a ‗student‘,
‗aged 21‘, and the other ‗editor of the 70s Bi-weekly‘, ‗aged 24‘. According to a report in
Huaqiao Ribao華僑日報, they were two different people, for their names have different Chinese characters, one being ‗莫昭如‘, and the other ‗莫潮如‘. See Huaqiao Ribao, 5 May 1971.
167
Kong Police used violence in an attempt to end the demonstration, and that it marked the transition from nationalism to anti-colonialism.
On 7 July 1971, which marked the 34th anniversary of the Marco Polo
Bridge Incident (盧溝橋事變) that sparked the Second Sino-Japanese War, a
Baodiao demonstration was held in Victoria Park in Causeway Bay at about 7pm. There are two documentary sources on the course of events: the official police report and reports in the newspapers. The demonstration was in the headlines in almost all the major newspapers the next day.
The police report, compiled on the same day the demonstration took place,
provides the most comprehensive account of what happened in Victoria Park.480
According to the report, a crowd started to gather in the park at approximately 5pm and an hour later, there were about 300 people, most of whom were spectators and members of the press. Tension started to build up after 6pm. At 6:40pm, the report states, ‗two youths with furled banners walked across a football pitch in the park and approached to within 100 yards of parked police vehicles‘. The two youths were surrounded by the crowd and the police
repeatedly gave warnings in Chinese to the crowd to disperse. The police arrested six people after these warnings were ignored. By 7pm the crowd had swelled to 3,000, most of whom were spectators. A crowd sitting on the ground
displayed ‗four banners and a portrait of Sun Yat-sen‘.481
There are several explanations as to why there was a portrait of Sun Yat-sen displayed in the demonstration. I shall come back to them later.
480 Police Report No.19, 7 July 1971, HKRS-70-2-324. 481Ibid.
168
Warnings by the police to disperse were ignored by the crowd. Arrests were made and in the process, some of the police officers were assaulted. When
the crowd again ignored warnings to disperse ‗baton charges were made‘.482 The
police began a sweep through Victoria Park shortly thereafter. In the chaos, two motorcycles, one a police motorcycle, were set on fire. Six people were taken to hospital for treatment of injuries, all of whom were discharged late in the evening.
Reports in the newspapers tell a similar story, with only minor differences
to the police report. The pro-China Wen Hui Bao reported that in the morning
some youths and students had visited the Japanese Consulate in the Central District to hand in a petition, and that the sit-in demonstration in Victoria Park was attended by approximately a thousand young people, most of whom were
students.483 Demonstrators held banners and distributed flyers with anti-Japanese
slogans. The South China Morning Post reported that the number of
demonstrators increased to about 2,000, and that the crowd eventually swelled to
3,000 ‗as they were joined by watching students and rowdy spectators‘.484
Before the demonstration started there were already police within and outside Victoria Park from early afternoon, with units stationed outside the Daimaru and Chancellor departmental stores. As soon as the demonstration began, the police
intervened. Riot police were called in. According to the Sing Tao Daily News星
島日報the disturbances spread to nearby areas as the crowd set fires at two spots
near the park.485 In the aftermath of the disturbances, the Sing Tao Daily
482 Ibid.
483Wen Hui Bao文匯報, 8 July 1971, p.4. 484South China Morning Post, 8 July 1971, p.1. 485Sing Tao Daily, 8 July 1971, p.23.
169
reported that 21 people were arrested, and six injured, five of whom were students.
As far as the Hong Kong Government was concerned, the 7 July demonstration was illegal. The application to hold the demonstration was provisionally approved by the Police, but it was later rejected by the Urban Council.486 At that time, the authorities had set out strict guidelines and rules regarding holding meetings or processions in a public place. Persons wishing to hold such meetings were required to make an application to the police beforehand. Having refused to give the organisers permission, the authorities took a tough approach towards the demonstration, which eventually turned into a violent confrontation between participants and the police.
At the 7 July demonstration the colonial government, for whom internal security was the top priority, took steps to suppress a supposedly nationalist movement. The government used the same approach to deal with the young demonstrators as they did with the leftists in 1967. However, unlike the leftists
in 1967, the young Baodiao demonstrators did not use violence to promote their
cause, while the government used violent means in an attempt to suppress a non-
violent demonstration.487 For that reason, the Hong Kong government‘s actions
soon came under criticisms.
486 Government Information Service, PressReview, No.128, 8 July 1971, p.1, HKRS-70-2-324. 487 For details, see South China Morning Post, 8 July 1971, p.1.
170