Search

Between 2007 and 2009, the Legislative Council in Hong Kong had passed a series of amendments in relation to law controlling domestic violence. The two most controversial provisions include (1) introduction of court mandated counseling; and (2) extension of protection to Tongzhi1 couples. In ‘Politicizing Han Chinese Masculinities: A Plea for Court Mandated Counseling for Wife Abusers in Hong Kong’,2 and ‘Contextualizing the Same-sex Erotic Relationship: Post-colonial Tongzhi and Transgender Political Discourse on Hong Kong and PRC Law of Marriage’,3 I had argued that both court mandated counseling and legal recognition of Tongzhi couples have no inherent conflict with Han Chinese traditional culture and thus can work effectively in Hong Kong, a predominately Han Chinese society. However, two questions remain unanswered: (1) Is Han Chinese traditional culture still influential and relevant in 21st century Hong Kong society? (2) Can the 2008 -2009 amendments produce justice? In this article, I adopt the Deleuzean perspective on time / history and Rawlsian theory of justice in responding to the questions. Also, I will refer to the theory of ‘transcultural simularity’ when examining how the foreign theories can engage smoothly with Hong Kong legal culture. I also hope the following discussion can shed light on the future development of legal device controlling domestic violence in Mainland China. Let us start with discussing the details of amendments.