March, 2007

A Sure-Win Election

Rose Wu

Election debates are often one of the highlights of any political campaign. They provide an opportunity for candidates to expand upon their platforms, test each other on their proposals and engage the public's attention as well as participation. Sometimes these debates can swing the result of an election. However, this typical electoral phenomenon is not the case in Hong Kong.

In March, there was for the first time in Hong Kong a chance for the chief executive candidates to answer questions posed by Election Committee members and ordinary citizens in which the public was able to compare the candidates' policy platforms. However, Hong Kong's election for the chief executive is very different. There are only 795 eligible voters. There was also no doubt who would win. Right from the very beginning of the campaign it was clear to everyone, including the two candidates, that Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen, Beijing's favoured candidate, would secure a victory. Thus, Tsang's landslide election with 649 votes to challenger Alan Leong Kah-kit's 123 votes came as no surprise.

In order to provide a platform for the public to play a more active role in the election, a mock poll was organised by Project Civil Referendum on the same day of the election. Although only 8,271 votes were cast in the mock election, more than 60 percent supported Leong for chief executive, 95 percent backed universal suffrage by 2012 and a majority of the voters demanded legislation for a minimum wage.

In such circumstances, it might be argued that there is little point for the pro-democracy camp to bother to select anyone to participate in such an election and to organise public debates with Donald Tsang. Taking a different route than past elections, the pro-democracy camp was able to secure enough nominations for the first time (134 nominations) to stand in the chief executive election. As Alan Leong, a Civic Party legislator, explained to the public, the greatest success of his participation in the election was that he was able to bring a "fundamental change" to Hong Kong's political culture and values by making a contested race possible. In concluding the debate on March 16, Leong hailed it as a victory for Hong Kong's people. "People want to see changes and dare to challenge a system that is unjust. We have a contested election. This is the victory for Hong Kong." In his final speech, he also urged greater communication between the central government and pan-democrats in the future.

However, the decision to join the Election Committee was not a united stance within the pro-democracy camp. At the end of a march for universal suffrage on March 18, organised by the pro-democratic camp and the Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF) and its allies, Lawmaker "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung of the League of Social Democrats (LSD) criticised Leong and other pro-democratic camp politicians for being complicit in a small-circle election. He commented that as leaders of Hong Kong's democracy movement they should not participate in a small-circle election. He added that the low turnout of 5,000 people for the march proved that Leong's campaign had been a failure.

Another democratic leader who also opposed Leong's participation in the election was Emily Lau Wai-hing of the Frontier. She strongly objected to the pro-democracy camp taking part in the Election Committee because it would only endorse the legitimacy of the small-circle election. She also criticised Leong for emphasising the contested nature of the election while forgetting to pinpoint its unfair nature.

One phenomenon which is worth seriously reflecting upon is that in spite of Leong winning much admiration for his performance and debating skills his public support still hovered around the 25 percent level while Tsang's popularity was about 65 percent. These figures seem to confirm the cynical view that the televised debates, which most observers believe were won by Leong, were not much more than shows staged for the entertainment of the public. As many political commentators noted, since Tsang is the only choice blessed by the Chinese government, it is quite natural that he will be supported by the majority of people in Hong Kong.

The question is whether Leong and his supporters were able to transform the election from being merely a political show to an opportunity to mobilise Hong Kong's people to fight for universal suffrage in 2012. The citizens of Hong Kong should not be merely bystanders of the chief executive election and never given the actual right to vote for the candidate of their choice. In fact, universal suffrage in Hong Kong has been the yearning of the people for more than two decades. The major objective of Hong Kong's democratic movement should be how and when do we abolish the small-circle election and achieve universal suffrage.

In order to achieve this goal, I suggest that the pro-democrats should concentrate on three areas in the future. The first one is to win the hearts of the Hong Kong people by spending more time in the districts listening to the needs of the grassroots people in different areas of the city and translating their needs into a concrete political agenda. The aim is to link the issue of democracy with people's livelihood and social justice. Secondly, the pro-democracy camp should put aside their differences and unite to push for universal suffrage in 2012. Lastly, they should pressure the government to organise a referendum for the people to express their preference for when and how to achieve universal suffrage in Hong Kong.

To end this article, I want to share a remark by Tsang during the election campaign in which he said that pushing for the ideal of achieving universal suffrage, as advocated by people like Emily Lau, could only be found in heaven. Thus, he advised Hong Kong's people to have the courage to accept the reality that we may not be able to change. Since Tsang is a Catholic, I want to challenge him on whether he believes in the coming of the Reign of God which is not somewhere out there in heaven. Instead, it is the power of the Holy Spirit that moves us to bring justice, peace and equality to the present world, especially for those who are poor and marginalised in our community.

Prophecy is not future-telling but articulating the truth of God, who is justice and merciful. As we approach the coming of Holy Week, it is time again for us to contemplate the meaning of Jesus Christ's crucifixion and resurrection for today's Hong Kong. Let us pray for God's inspiration and guidance that the people and our political leaders, including Chief Executive Donald Tsang, will dare to bring the true hope of democracy to Hong Kong.