ABSTRACT
In the West, liberalism has it that the market as well as the rule of law serves as the precondition and safeguard for civil citizenship. Evidence nonetheless shows that a market economy does not necessarily generate a liberal regime or the rule of law in some countries (Kamarul and Tomasic 1999; Jayasuriya 1999), and political and legal discourses are often multiple and contested in a society (Hall et al. 1978; Hunt 1993; Lazarus-Black and Hirsch 1994; Leonard 1995). In capitalist Hong Kong, the idea of the “rule of law” has long been incorporated into the hegemonic narrative of economic success. It serves well as far as rhetorical purposes are concerned, especially for a city that prides itself on market efficiency, liberty, and political stability. In reality, however, the idea of law has been subject to conflicting interpretations under the impact of historical legacies, local politics, national influences, and international relations.1 In particular, two competing discourses have been at work, namely a discourse of “civil society” emphasizing the ideas of rights and the rule of law, and a more authoritarian discourse of “law and order,” which give rise to much contestation over citizenship, rights, and legitimacy in local politics.
