February, 2004

China Plants a Stop Sign on Hong Kong's Road to Democracy

Rose Wu

In his seventh policy address, Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa failed to give a firm timetable for launching a promised review of Hong Kong's political development but instead appointed Chief Secretary Donald Tsang Yam-kuen to lead a three-member task force to consult the central government about its anxieties and the way forward. He also referred to President Hu Jintao's high level of concern about political reform in Hong Kong that he shared with Tung during his visit to Beijing in December. When he was asked at a press conference after the address whether the public's views on democracy were only a secondary concern, Tung explained that any public consultation would be a fruitless and dangerous exercise without the prior consent of Beijing. " 'One country, two systems' is not simply about two systems but one country [as well]," he said.

Tung's policy address not only ignored Hong Kong people's democratic aspirations as reflected in the massive demonstrations on July 1 and New Year's Day but also the result of the pro-democratic camp's victories in November's district council elections. It was even more embarrassing that Secretary for Constitutional Affairs Stephen Lam Sui-lung, a member of the task force, had promised that a timetable would be published in December and public consultation would begin this year. However, Lam finally admitted that the timetable had been postponed upon a direct request from the central government.

Immediately after Tung's address on Jan. 7 the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office (HKMAO) of the State Council issued a statement saying that Tung and the Hong Kong government must conduct thorough consultations with relevant departments of the central government on the issue before making detailed arrangements. The HKMAO spokesperson also emphasised that Hong Kong's political reform must "move step by step in line with the Basic Law on the basis of maintaining prosperity and stability."

It was the first time since 1997 that Beijing had commented formally on a policy address, and it was the first time since the handover that the executive arm of the central government had released a written statement about Hong Kong's affairs. As some Chinese experts pointed out, the fact that Beijing had made its views known so quickly and bluntly reflected their high level of concern over the direction of political reform in Hong Kong and that it is not the Tung administration but the central government that will have the final word on the pace and arrangements for the city's political reform.

In addition, Beijing's warning that it would control the pace of Hong Kong's political development was even more rigorously expressed by Prof. Xiao Weiyun, a member of the Basic Law Drafting Committee, at a forum in Hong Kong on Jan. 16. Prof. Xiao said that electing the chief executive by universal suffrage in 2007 goes against the Basic Law principle of "gradual and orderly progress," which to him, he said, was a period of 30 to 40 years. He added that if the chief executive were to be elected by universal suffrage in 2007 it would have been stated in the Basic Law when it was drafted in the 1980s. Although he admitted that the Basic Law Drafting Committee did not go into detail on the meaning of the principle of "gradual and orderly progress," he did say that the methods for electing the first and second chief executives in 1997 and 2002 had been good examples of this principle in that the first chief executive was selected by a 400-member Election Committee while the second leader was chosen by a committee twice that size.

Prof. Xiao also expressed his disagreement with the call for " political power to the people," a slogan used in both the July 1 and Jan. 1 demonstrations organised by the Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF). According to his interpretation, the central government had returned power to Hong Kong's people on July 1, 1997, when it reassumed sovereignty over the city. He also said that the National People's Congress (NPC) had authorised Hong Kong to exercise a high degree of autonomy but had not given it complete autonomy. Consequently, the central government, he maintained, has the power to decide the development of Hong Kong's political system.

Xu Chongde, who was invited to Hong Kong to speak on the same occasion as Prof. Xiao and two other mainland legal experts, said that Hong Kong should focus on the economy, not politics. He argued that Hong Kong had done well in the past six years and that there thus was no need for drastic changes. The Basic Law has provided a set of mechanisms for electoral changes to the political system if "there is a need" to do so, he said, and it stipulated that any changes should be made in accordance with the principles of "orderly and gradual progress" and the "practical conditions" of Hong Kong. Obviously, China's leaders do not see the need nor do they consider full universal suffrage by 2007 as being consistent with the gradualist approach.

The question then is, What was stated in the Basic Law regarding the implementation of Hong Kong's political reform?

Regarding the implementation of political reform in Hong Kong, the Basic Law, Hong Kong's mini-Constitution, provides a blueprint for the political development of the HKSAR. It allows in Paragraph 7 of Annex 1 for the electoral methods for selecting the chief executive to be changed "if there is a need to amend the method for selecting the chief executive for the terms subsequent to the year 2007" and in Section 3 of Annex 2 the possibility for all Legislative Council (Legco) members to be directly elected in 2008. It also promises that both will eventually be elected by universal suffrage. In Article 45 pertaining to the future election of the chief executive, the Basic Law states:

"The method for selecting the chief executive shall be specified in the light of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nomination committee in accordance with democratic procedures."

Responding to the interpretations above by the China legal experts about the Basic Law's intended timetable for introducing universal suffrage, both local law experts and members of the pro-democracy camp agree that since Paragraph 7 of Annex 1 of the Basic Law does not clearly state whether changes can or cannot be made in the year 2007 there is thus room for Hong Kong's people to demand change in 2007. They maintain that the only qualifications are that the method for selecting the chief executive is to be specified in light of the actual situation in Hong Kong and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly progress.

First of all, what then is Hong Kong's actual situation?

Based on the huge demonstrations on July 1 and Jan. 1, it is evident that Hong Kong's people are already taking part in participatory democracy. They have stated their views very clearly, very peacefully, very maturely: they want democracy and political reform as soon as possible. Moreover, the only way to solve the existing problem of people's dissatisfaction with the Tung administration is to change the present small-circle election in which the chief executive is chosen by only 800 people. In addition, the will of the people can only be adequately represented by Legco if all legislators are directly elected in geographical constituencies. In the 2004 Legco election in September, only half of the seats will be decided in this manner. The remainder will be elected by functional constituencies, which are primarily open only to the privileged sectors. Under this system, some people have more than one vote, one in their functional constituency and one in their geographical constituency. According to many opinion polls that were conducted in the past two months, almost all of the results indicate that a majority of Hong Kong's people feel that 2007 and 2008 is the right time to introduce democratic reforms in Hong Kong. They understand that only when they gain their right to choose their leaders can they hold them accountable.

Secondly, what is "gradual and orderly progress"?

Here the thoughts of the then-chairman of the drafting committee of the Basic Law, Ji Pengfei, in his address to the Seventh NPC on March 28, 1990, provides guidance in which he said that in the 10 years between 1997 and 2007 the chief executive will be elected by a broadly representative Election Committee. If there is a need to amend this method of election after that period, such amendment must be made, he said. Therefore, Ji added, the 10-year period after the handover should be a reasonable amount of time to follow the principle of gradual and orderly progress.

In conclusion, as the convenor of CHRF, I want to respond to Prof Xiao's comment about our slogan "Power to the People." Our meaning of "Power to the People" does not relate to the transfer of sovereignty from the colonial government of Britain to China but rather the introduction of democracy, that is, people's power to rule through direct elections. It is vitally important that Hong Kong's people, including its political parties, seek a consensus and convince China's leaders to allow Hong Kong to implement direct elections as soon as possible. As noted by Prof. Kuan Hsin-chi, chairman of the Government and Public Administration Dept. at Chinese University, the most difficult questions facing Hong Kong's constitutional development are political rather than legal. A crucial factor is whether the major political parties are willing to shoulder the necessary political risk for the sake of the long-term development of Hong Kong.

As for the argument by the China legal experts and some local business people that Hong Kong should focus on economic development rather than politics, we want to stress that Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) clearly states that "every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity . . . (a) to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives; (b) to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors; and (c) to have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his country." Moreover, the chief principle of democracy is political equality, which is to be achieved by citizen participation through fair and open institutions. Democracy is a common asset of modern civilisation, the product of a long and difficult struggle in the history of humankind.

Thus, it is reasonable and legitimate for Hong Kong's people to demand our equal political rights to elect our political leaders through fair and open elections beginning in 2007 and 2008. Moreover, it is now well understood that only when the government is elected and accountable to the people can we be more certain that social and economic policies will adequately respond to the needs and demands of the people, especially the marginalized sectors of the community. We believe that only with political equality can each and every citizen fully develop their potential and only under the principle of democracy will justice flourish in our society.

I truly hope that the Beijing government will listen carefully to the demands of Hong Kong's people. What Hong Kong's people are asking for is universal suffrage to elect our political leaders, which, in the end, is the only way to make the principal of governance of "one country, two systems" successful.

Regarding the demands of CHRF to the three-member task force led by Chief Secretary Donald Tsang, we sincerely hope that the people of Hong Kong's aspirations for democracy will be conveyed to the central government and that the public consultation on constitutional reform will begin as soon as possible, including details about the timetable, election method, etc. As legislator Emily Lau pointed out in her article in the South China Morning Post on Jan. 13, a significant hurdle in communication between Beijing and Hong Kong is caused by Beijing's longstanding ban imposed on many directly elected Legco members from the pro-democracy movement to travel to the mainland. Consequently, Beijing's policies on Hong Kong are very often only informed by the views of pro-Beijing figures in the HKSAR, which do not reflect a comprehensive and exact picture of reality in Hong Kong.

Lastly, Hong Kong's people should not feel threatened by the strong oppositional sentiments that have been aired. We should continue to speak up and express our views as clearly as possible. We learned during last year's Article 23 debate that when the people are united we will not be defeated.

When we lived under the colonial rule of Britain, Hong Kong was characterised as "borrowed time, borrowed place." Now Hong Kong has returned to China as a SAR. We welcome the end of our colonial status, and we are even more empowered to assert our rights as citizens in which the framework for Hong Kong's transition to full democracy has been enshrined in the Basic Law.