The contrarian

WHENEVER we travel to another country, we have to undergo formalities before we gain admittance. This usually means answering simple questions such as: purpose of visit, length of stay, origin of journey. Since we are dealing with a human being, it does no harm to be courteous, clear, and, as far as possible, it is a good idea to avoid combativeness, surliness, or any characteristic which may be construed to be that we do not altogether respect the authority of the one who is questioning us.

This brings us to Conchita Carpio-Morales. She, of course, has had a stellar career, culminating in a seven year stint as a member of the Supreme Court, followed by a further seven years as Ombudsman. She is used to being treated with deference but last week had problems with Hong Kong immigration.

I have noticed, however, that she does not suffer foods gladly. As a witness at the Corona impeachment trial in 2011 she was prickly with Niel Tupas. “I must sound like a broken record” she said on more than one occasion when she believed the questioning to be repetitive.

The immigration procedure at Hong Kong is a great leveler. There is no difference in the mind of a HK immigration official between a Supreme Court judge and a domestic helper. If Morales was answering questions with questions of her own, she would have problems.

As far as I know, there has been no word from the Hong Kong authorities so it is difficult to obtain a balanced picture as to what happened.

It is clear, however, that the immigration official was not satisfied with Morales’ answers to his enquiries. It is standard practice that a second interview then be carried out. After the second interview Morales was cleared to enter Hong Kong. Some accounts suggested that she was banned from entry but that this decision was reversed. I do not think there was any reversal. She was not banned.

Hong Kong is designated as a “Special Administrative Region” of China. The joint agreement between China and the United Kingdom, signed in 1985, specified that for 50 years from the transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong from the UK to China in 1997, the mechanisms of government in Hong Kong will remain unchanged from when it was a British administered territory.

“One country, two systems” intoned Chinese Premier Deng Xiao Ping in 1985. China has adhered to this agreement. Hong Kongers are quick to protest if they believe that China is, in any way, curtailing the rights of people, including visitors, in Hong Kong.

It is wrong, as portrayed in a cartoon published in a national broadsheet last Friday, that Morales was on a stop list and banned from entry to Hong Kong. She was not.

I am sad that she found the experience upsetting and so did not persevere with her family trip to Hong Kong Disneyland.

I was even more saddened when some petty vindictiveness initiated by RCBC and reportedly implemented as a result of representations made by then Sen. Osmeña prevented former RCBC branch manager Maia Deguito from leaving NAIA to travel on a family weekend to Tokyo Disneyland in 2016. I must admit I experienced some schadenfreude (marisi) when Osmeña failed to retain his place in Senate in 2016 or to regain it in 2019.

The Philippines should stop playing the victim. Morales was not bullied. Deguito was./PN