Hong Kong’s first post-handover leader, Tung Chee-hwa, who struggled to cope with an Asian financial crisis and growing protests for democracy in the early years under Chinese rule, has died at age 89.

His office said in a statement that Mr. Tung passed away peacefully in the presence of his family members on Tuesday (September 8, 2026).

Mr. Tung, a shipping tycoon, had little political experience before a panel of pro-Beijing elites picked him in 1997 to be the first leader of the southern Chinese territory after the end of British colonial rule.

Many believe Beijing perceived Mr. Tung as a loyalist who would obey the Communist leadership’s edicts. He was also seen as beholden to Beijing because China’s state-run banks helped rescue his family’s ailing shipping company — Orient Overseas Container Line — during a global slump in the 1980s.

The early years after the handover were sensitive. The “one country, two systems” formula, in which Hong Kong was supposed to maintain civil liberties and other remnants of its British past while Beijing had the final say on issues such as political change, was still untested.

Mr. Tung was praised for his work ethic, even nicknamed “7-11” because of his reputation for long workdays, but clumsy political skills and perceived indecisiveness as major crises mounted, eroding his popularity and leading to a less flattering nickname, “Old Dumb Tung.” Shortly after Tung took office in 1997, Hong Kong was hit by bird flu — the first known cases of the virus in humans. The wealthy city’s economy was also battered by a financial crisis that swept across Asia.

Mr. Tung’s response to the two crises was widely criticised, and his deep distrust of the media hindered his ability to improve his image. He was also prone to policy gaffes that made him the butt of jokes.

Despite his rocky first term, Mr. Tung was reelected unopposed by the pro-Beijing electoral committee in 2002.

A year later, Mr. Tung faced another serious test when SARS — severe acute respiratory syndrome — hit Hong Kong, killing nearly 300 people and devastating the economy. Tung’s government was accused of a sloppy, sluggish response.

Later in 2003, Mr. Tung drew more criticism by proposing an anti-subversion law, locally known as Article 23 legislation. Many saw it as a threat to civil liberties, and an estimated half a million people joined a street march against it. The government later scrapped the legislation.

Hong Kongers held another massive protest in 2004 to demand direct elections for the city’s leader and the entire legislature. Mr. Tung sided with China’s communist leaders, who rejected it, and the rally became an annual event for pro-democracy supporters for years.

The large-scale protests might have signaled to Beijing that the Hong Kong public was becoming more politically divided and that Tung was losing control.

He confirmed he was leaving on March 10, 2005, insisting his failing health was the reason, not pressure from Beijing. “If I continue as chief executive, I won’t be able to handle it,” he said.

Many were suspicious about Mr. Tung’s explanation because no health problems were apparent in the months before his resignation.

Mr. Tung was born in Shanghai on May 29, 1937, and his family moved to Hong Kong in 1947, two years before the Communists took over the mainland.

After earning a degree in marine engineering from the University of Liverpool in 1960, Mr. Tung worked for General Electric and his family’s shipping company in the United States before returning to Hong Kong in 1969.

He started a think tank after leaving the city’s top job and remained a Beijing loyalist during major protests for democracy in 2019 and an ensuing crackdown on dissent in which the central government imposed a national security law on the city that outlawed subversion.

As the protests raged in September 2019, he was among 42 people who received national medals and honours from Chinese leader Xi Jinping at a ceremony in Beijing for their contributions to the country. Mr. Tung was recognised for devoting himself to the implementation of the “one country, two systems” policy.

Following the enactment of the security law in 2020, massive protests that once challenged Tung’s leadership vanished from the city. Tung has not been seen at public events over the past several years.

Published – September 09, 2026 10:31 am IST

Ronson Chan, ex-chairman of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, speaks to reporters outside the High Court in Admiralty in Hong Kong before a ruling on his appeal against his conviction for obstructing a police officer, on May 29, 2026.
| Photo Credit: AP

Tourists relax on the waterfront in front of Victoria Harbour, with the iconic skyline buildings as a backdrop, in Hong Kong, China.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Birds fly over the burned buildings at the fire scene at Wang Fuk Court, a residential estate in the Tai Po district of Hong Kong’s New Territories, Thursday, Nov. 27 2025.
| Photo Credit: AP

A screen displays the voting results rejecting the registration of same-sex partnerships bill, which would have allowed same-sex couples registered abroad to register locally, in the Legislative Council chamber in Hong Kong on September 10, 2025.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Authorities in Hong Kong spent Rs 76 lakh ($90,028) earlier this year on a competition to rename two giant pandas, gifted by China, but ended up retaining the original names despite spending the huge sum. According to a report in the South China Morning Post (SCMP), the giant panda renaming competition started in October where the public was invited to come up with fresh names for “An An” and “Ke Ke” — the two bears, who arrived from Sichuan.

As per the Culture, Sports and Tourism Bureau, the taxpayer’s money was spent to build a website for the activity, recruit staff, post advertisements on internet and Hong Kong’s Mass Transit Railway (MTR) stations in addition to offering prizes to the winners.

The winner of the competition was awarded prizes worth Rs 5.16 lakh which included a tourbillon watch, valued around Rs 4 lakh and membership and vouchers for Ocean Park where the pandas are kept. Despite offering the prizes, the judges, who did not take any pay for their services, announced that the pandas would keep their original names.

Quizzed about the wastage of funds, Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism Rosanna Law Shuk-pui said the authorities were not to know that the public would prefer keeping the original names.

Notably, the giant pandas in Hong Kong are usually named either after seeking suggestions from the public, or by keeping the names given to them while breastfeeding, or by adopting the names that were given to them by the authorities.

Also Read | Giant Pandas Flown To US From China Aboard ‘Panda Express’

Giant pandas arrive

Male “An An” and female “Ke Ke” are both aged five, the equivalent of 15 in human years. The pair arrived in the country amid much fanfare in September when Chief Secretary Eric Chan Kwok-ki and Tourism Minister Kevin Yeung Yun-hung welcomed them at the Hong Kong International Airport in a glittering ceremony.

As per Ocean Park chairman Paulo Pong, An An and Ke Ke could help bring in customers and generate revenue. “It is difficult to put a number on [costs] as it is more than just about the income or the park, or the profit or losses. We believe our social responsibility is strong,” Mr Pong said.

“Most importantly we want to bring people to the park, to buy tickets or annual passes to maintain a steady income flow,” he added.

The pandas were unveiled to the public last week with the park anticipating huge rush in the days leading up to Christmas.

Beijing has announced that it will impose visa restrictions on US officials who have “interfered” in Hong Kong affairs. This move comes after Washington said it would impose visa restrictions on Hong Kong officials last month.

According to Mao Ning, a spokesperson for China’s foreign ministry, the US has “violently interfered in China’s internal affairs” by imposing visa restrictions on Chinese officials over Hong Kong issues.

Mao stated that China has decided to impose visa restrictions on US officials who have performed poorly on Hong Kong-related issues. The move is based on China’s foreign relations law and a law on countering foreign sanctions.

Mao emphasised that Hong Kong is a part of China and that Hong Kong affairs are China’s internal matters.

“I shall emphasise that Hong Kong is China’s Hong Kong, and Hong Kong affairs are purely China’s internal matters,” Mao said. “We urge the US side to genuinely respect China’s sovereignty, respect the rule of law in Hong Kong, and stop interfering in Hong Kong affairs in any way.”

The US had previously announced that it would impose visa restrictions on Hong Kong officials after 45 pro-democracy advocates were sentenced to prison in November. The sentences ranged from four years and two months to 10 years.

“The 45 defendants sentenced today were aggressively prosecuted, and many now face life-altering imprisonment simply for their peaceful participation in political activities which are protected under the Basic Law of Hong Kong,” US Department of State spokesperson Matthew Miller said after the sentencing hearing.

The Hong Kong government condemned the US move, saying that foreign governments and organisations had “turned a blind eye to the facts” and made “exaggerated remarks” about the landmark case.
 

Hong Kong’s top court has made a landmark ruling in favour of same-sex married couples, upholding their rights to subsidised housing benefits and equal inheritance.

This decision marks a significant victory for the LGBTQ+ community in Hong Kong, who have traditionally faced discrimination and fewer rights compared to heterosexual couples.

According to the Associated Press, Court of Final Appeal’s unanimous decision dismissed the government’s appeals, ending years-long legal battles over the differential treatment of same-sex couples married overseas.

Government lawyer Monica Carss-Frisk claimed that Hong Kong’s housing policy aimed to promote “procreation” among heterosexual couples. 

However, Chief Justice Andrew Cheung disagreed, stating that excluding same-sex couples from public rental flats and subsidised flats under the Home Ownership Scheme was unjustifiable.

“[For] needy same-sex married couples who cannot afford private rental accommodation, the [government’s] exclusionary policy could well mean depriving them of any realistic opportunity of sharing family life under the same roof at all,” Cheung said.

The ruling also declared that disputed provisions in inheritance laws are “discriminatory and unconstitutional.” Hong Kong’s government respects the court’s decision and will study the judgments to determine next steps.

Currently, Hong Kong does not recognise same-sex marriage, but the city does recognise same-sex marriage for certain purposes, such as taxation and civil service benefits. 

This ruling is a significant step towards equality, but activists remain hopeful that Hong Kong will eventually legalise same-sex marriage, following in the footsteps of Taiwan and Thailand.

Nick Infinger, who was the first to launch a judicial review against the Housing Authority in 2018, told reporters that the rulings “acknowledged same-sex couples can love each other and deserve to live together.”

“This is not only fighting for me and for my partner, but this is fighting for all the same-sex couples in Hong Kong,” he added.

This landmark ruling is a significant milestone in the fight for LGBTQ+ rights in Hong Kong, and activists hope it will inspire further progress towards equality.
 

Hong Kong’s police force is taking on a campaign to install thousands of surveillance cameras across the city to ramp up their crime-fighting capabilities. The Chinese city, consistently ranked among the world’s safest, plans to introduce facial recognition and artificial intelligence tools to enhance law enforcement. Critics, however, warn that this could come at the cost of privacy and freedom.

Hong Kong has close to 55,000 public CCTV cameras, with plans to add 2,000 more this year, announced security Chief Chris Tang in July. The police force is considering equipping these cameras with facial recognition technology and AI tools to help identify suspects. “The police will definitely comply with relevant laws,” said the force in a statement to CNN, though details on when these technologies might be deployed remain vague.

Experts are raising alarms about the repressive potential of surveillance technology, especially in Hong Kong. They draw parallels to mainland China’s extensive surveillance systems, highlighting the heightened concern in Hong Kong, where political dissent has been severely limited since the national security law was introduced after the 2019 anti-government protests.

Hong Kong already has more than 54,500 public CCTV cameras, equating to about seven cameras per 1,000 people. That number puts it on par with major cities like New York, though far behind China’s urban centres, where an average of 440 cameras per 1,000 people is commonplace. 

Mr Tang highlighted that countries like the UK have also started using facial recognition cameras. However, experts warn that even in these democracies, the implementation of such technology has raised significant concerns about privacy. 

Normann Witzleb, a professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said, “It’s important to design guidelines for those systems that take proper recognition of the potential benefits that they have, but that also acknowledge they’re not foolproof, and that they have the potential to interfere with (people’s) rights in serious ways,” he said. 

Steve Tsang, director of the SOAS China Institute, warned that the new cameras could be used for political repression under the guise of fighting crime. “This is likely to be a further step in making Hong Kong law enforcement closer to how it is done on the Chinese mainland,” he said.

Samantha Hoffman, a nonresident fellow at the National Bureau of Asian Research, noted, “The difference is how the technology is being used.” While Western democracies face their challenges with surveillance technology, she argues that the situation in Hong Kong is fundamentally different due to the legal framework supporting the government’s authority. She remarked, “When you feel like you’re being monitored, that affects your behaviour and your feelings of freedom,” as per CNN. 

Click for more trending news

Critics say officials in the Chinese finance hub have used the sedition offence, which has roots in British colonial rule, to target government critics and stifle dissent.
| Photo Credit: AFP

Hong Kong police said on Saturday (August 31, 2024) that two people were arrested for sedition under a new national security law, accusing them of spreading hatred against Chinese and local authorities.

The arrests on Friday came only a day after the pro-democracy news outlet Stand News and two former editors were found guilty of sedition, the first conviction of its kind since the city came under Chinese rule in 1997.

Critics say officials in the Chinese finance hub have used the sedition offence, which has roots in British colonial rule, to target government critics and stifle dissent.

A man aged 41 and a 28-year-old woman were arrested on Friday for committing “an act or acts that had a seditious intention” and remained in custody, police said in a statement.

Hong Kong media reports said the arrests were made in connection to a note widely circulated on social media this week after a university professor was killed on railway tracks.

The author expressed suicidal thoughts due to despair over Hong Kong’s future. AFP was unable to verify the identity of the person who wrote it.

Police said the woman was suspected of “publishing fraudulent ‘last words’ of the deceased in relation to a recent suicide case”.

They said the man was accused of placing “memorial light boxes” in various places, with contents “provoking hatred” of the governments in Beijing and Hong Kong, police said.

The new national security law, passed in March and commonly known as Article 23, increased the maximum jail term for sedition from two years to seven.

It is Hong Kong’s second national security law and follows the one imposed by Beijing in 2020 after huge, sometimes violent pro-democracy protests a year earlier.

Those protests prompted a crackdown on free speech that has seen critics of China jailed or forced into exile

The United States and Britain are among vocal critics of the new law, which they say has curbed rights.

By August 1, 301 people had been arrested for national security crimes under various laws.

hol/pbt