University of Warwick Undergraduate Research Support Scheme
The rule of law is the heart of the British administration. Thus, it was important for the British government to collect sufficient evidence before taking action against the communist schools. The following examples show how it demonstrated its legality when it closed a communist school and deregistered suspected communist school staff.
1. The Closure of Tat Tak Institute
Tat Tak Institute was established in September 1946. The Director of Education suspected it to be a communist school shorty after its establishment because:
-
The school premises owner was anti-Kuomintang.
-
The school did not submit any proper syllabus to the government.
-
The school library displayed communist literature.
-
Most of its students were not local Hong Kong residents.
However, the colonial government had expressed concerns that they did not and could not take any action against the school because of the lack of evidence.
“The Director of Education reported that his inspectors…had found little signs of political activity.”
“The inspectors could not find evidence that communist or other political activities were being carried on, though it was not denied that many of the teachers were members or sympathisers of the China Democratic League.”
Sir Alexander Grantham, Governor
Image via Oxford Dictionary of National Biography
The British government concluded that they could obtain sufficient evidence not until September 1948, when a police report stated that Tat Tak Institute was related to a communist courier arrested in Hong Kong.
The British government believed that it had sufficient evidence to justify the closure of the school only in April 1949, around two years and a half since they were suspicious of the school. [1]
[1] National Archive, CO 537/4815, ‘Communist activities in Hong Kong (with top secret annex))’
Sir Alexander Grantham, Governor
“The documents seized on the courier provided enough evidence to justify..."
2. The deregistration of Pui Kiu Middle School's headmaster
Pui Kiu Middle School (培僑中學) is one of the most renowned communist schools in Hong Kong. In July 1958, the British government issued the deregistration and deportation of Mr Parker Tu (杜伯奎), the headmaster of Pui Kiu Middle School.
Since he became the headmaster in 1956, the British government had suspected that he “encouraged the subversion of students at the school” because of his involvement in the communist activities of USSR and the CCP.
Again, the British government could not take legal action despite the strong suspicion because of the lack of evidence.
“…we are vulnerable both legally and politically.”
“…we could not produce [evidence of subversive activities] and to wait until subversion exposed itself for all to see…”
Sir Robert Black, Governor
Image via Wikipedia of HK Government Public Record Office
After two years, the British government concluded that it had sufficient evidence to deregister and deport Mr Tu. For example, the school library presented communist literature and there was a daily study of the communist publication "China Youth”. The evidence showed that Mr. Tu violated the Education Ordinance, which forbade any kind of political activities in schools.[2]
[2] National Archive, FO 371/133338, ‘Communist activities in schools in Hong Kong’
'China Youth' published in 1956
Image via Communist Youth League of China
3. The Deregistration of Yu Hua School's Headmaster
In 1968, the British government deregistered a communist school called Chung Wah Middle School. After the deregistration, a new communist school named Yu Hua School (育華中學) was opened on the same school premises but with different staff.
The headmaster of Chung Wah Middle School, Mr. Cho Fan Wong (黃祖棻), was the school premises owner. The British government considered his frequent visit to the new Yu Hua School violating section 50 of the Education Ordinance:
“Where the registration of a school has been cancelled no teacher or pupil of the school shall save with the permission… [to] enter or remain upon or in the premises in which the school was operated.”
Yet, the British government was cautious to take legal action because:
-
He had the right to visit the premises as a premise owner.
-
It was hard to define whether his visit was ‘frequent’ enough to break the law. Again, the British government could not find strong evidence proving his political motive to visit Yu Wah School.
4. Publicity Campaign
In June 1972, the colonial government suggested launching a publicity campaign to publicise communist schools’ failures and non-communist schools’ successes in public exams on press. They tried to issue some “inspired articles” as part of the campaign.
Nevertheless, they “called a temporary halt to denigrating exam results” in less than five months. It was because the results of the communist schools significantly improved, and they could no longer justify the publicity campaign.
"... the latest result [from the communist schools] have been significantly better ... not so much as to enable us to put quite so much emphasis on their poor result."[4]
Colonial Secretariat of Hong Kong
[4] FCO 40/382
The British government sought to make sure that its action taken against the communist schools was backed by the Education Ordinance and sufficient evidence.
It could hence demonstrate that they upheld the spirit of the rule of law,
and never suppressed the political enemies illegally.
