November, 2005

Speak Truth to Power

Chan Ka-lok

(The author is an associate professor in the Dept. of Government and International Studies at Hong Kong Baptist University.)

The conventional motion of thanks by the Legislative Council (Legco) for Chief Executive Donald Tsang's first policy address was rejected at the end of a three-day debate. The government said it was puzzled and disappointed. Tsang, whose populism and showmanship have won him strong approval ratings in recent opinion polls, took no notice though of criticism levelled against his administration.

Tsang has pledged to give people a "pragmatic," but "strong," government since Beijing offered him the top post. His first policy address, indeed, was entitled "Strong Governance for the People." However, Tsang's brand of strong governance is quintessentially conservative, authoritarian and high-handed. Government by the people is simply out of the question, notwithstanding the pro-democracy pronouncements of the Tsang administration.

Few in Hong Kong, however, expected Tsang, who came to power as a result of a leadership overhaul engineered by Beijing, to yield to public demands for universal suffrage in the current round of constitutional reform. Yet, on several occasions, the same Mr. Tsang has spoken favourably about democracy for Hong Kong. "Personally, I support universal suffrage as early as possible," said Tsang in Washington at the end of October. He further has argued that his package of proposals for constitutional development represents "a move substantively towards the ultimate aim of universal suffrage."

Despite the beautiful slogan "Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong," the chief executive election has always been a travesty. The 800-member Election Committee is dominated by powerful business lobbies and a host of functional constituencies which pursue their own agenda at the expense of the will of the people.

Tsang has now proposed to increase the number of members of the Election Committee from 800 to 1,600 in 2007. It will be done by the inclusion of all 529 district council members (no less than 120 of these members are government-appointed) and to award additional seats to the existing business lobbies and functional constituency sectors. The hurdle for nominating chief executive candidates will be raised from 100 to 200 Election Committee members.

It must be pointed out that the proposed enlargement of the Election Committee will not change anything. Power will remain firmly in the hands of a few. In short, the vast majority of ordinary citizens will continue to be excluded from the election of their chief executive. The new system is carefully designed to (1) keep the special interests in power, (2) the opposition out of the electoral race and (3) public participation to a minimal level in ways that are indirect and grossly distorted.

Tsang has further proposed that in 2008 the number of Legco members will be increased from 60 to 70. Half of the new seats will be returned by the existing geographical constituencies through direct elections with the district council members awarded the other five additional functional constituency seats. The room for public participation in Legco elections will be marginally greater thanks to the five geographical constituency seats.

However, the government's involvement in the district council functional constituency election through their appointees is absolutely unacceptable. The government has been unable, or unwilling, to disclose what system of election it has in mind for these seats, but it is likely to degenerate into the practice of patronage and cronyism commonly found in similar corporatist arrangements in other functional constituencies.

Moreover, Tsang has provided no further details about the pace towards democracy beyond 2007 and 2008. Calls for a timetable towards universal suffrage have fallen on deaf ears. "Take it, or leave it," Tsang has told critics. He has increasingly become a strong and self-assured, but hardly reasonable, leader.

In all, Tsang's constitutional development package, which is now better known as "the district council package" in the local media, has nothing to do with democratisation as Hong Kong's citizens have come to understand it. One is hard-pressed to see how this package will enhance political equality, citizen participation, accountability and social justice for the population at large. What Tsang has put forward is but a host of tactical manoeuvres towards the consolidation of an authoritarian and conservative government. Hong Kong deserves better.

In a collective act of defiance, Hong Kong's citizens voted overwhelmingly for pro-democracy candidates during the Legco elections in September 2004. The democracy movement has been in the doldrums, however, in the past year. It is now time for solidarity.

But how much can a small pocket of dissent achieve? Rosa Parks, a humble and soft-talking seamstress, proved that changing the world can start with one quiet act of personal determination. She defied the U.S. law which required black people to give up their bus seats to whites.

"At the time I was arrested, I had no idea it would turn into this," Parks recalled." It was just a day like any other day. The only thing that made it significant was that the masses of the people joined in."

Her 1955 protest action in Alabama gave birth to the modern U.S. civil rights movement that culminated in the 1964 Civil Rights Act and an end to segregation.

"Without vision, the people will perish; and without courage and inspiration, dreams will die—the dream of freedom and peace," said Parks, who died on Oct. 24 at the age of 92.

Hong Kong is at a crossroads. The dividing line runs between the government and the democrats as much as within every one of us. Every citizen in Hong Kong is now presented with a stark choice: to speak truth to power or yield to falsehood.