By Emily Lau

One of Hong Kong’s most outspoken and popular politicians, Emily Lau leads The Frontier party.


Since Hong Kong’s Legislative Council (Legco) rejected a constitutional development package proposed by chief executive Donald Tsang in December 2005, political reform has ground to a halt.

On March 25, an 800-member committee chooses the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s next chief executive (CE). Although there may be more than one candidate this time, the result is still pre-ordained. Beijing has hand-picked Mr Tsang for another term.

One reason is that Mr Tsang does what he’s told. After a huge demonstration on July 1, 2003, when more than 500,000 people wearing black marched in sweltering heat to oppose a bill on national security, Beijing lost confidence in the former chief executive, C.H. Tung, a shipping tycoon it had handpicked to serve as the first CE.

Swiftly, Beijing moved to take control of the constitutional-development process. In April 2004, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress ruled out elections by universal suffrage for the CE in 2007 and for all Legco members in 2008. Regrettably, Mr Tsang has done precious little to argue the people’s case for democratic government.

In the small-circle election in March, Alan Leong of the Civic Party stands as a candidate to challenge Mr Tsang. Some people like the gesture of having an alternative candidate as a way to create competition and spur public debate. Yet it’s a foregone conclusion that Mr Tsang will win.

A vast majority of Hong Kong people want a vote in choosing the CE. But how does fielding a challenger to the anointed Mr Tsang help to achieve early universal suffrage? Joining a small-circle election may lend legitimacy to the farcical exercise. A boycott, conversely, would show that many people reject the process and view it with contempt.

Naturally, Beijing wants everyone in Hong Kong to accept and support the small-circle election, giving it a look of legitimacy and a mandate. Mainland officials need reminding that no matter how they dress up a small-circle election, it’s seen as ludicrous in Hong Kong and overseas.

Beijing refuses to yield an inch on when Hong Kong may gain democracy. At a Legco question session on January 11, Mr Tsang blamed pro-democracy legislators for failing to agree on an electoral model with universal and equal suffrage. But once given a date for universal suffrage, the pan-democrats could compromise on a common model.

No doubt, Hong Kong people want the pan-democrats to take a more proactive role in helping to achieve full democracy. The ongoing impasse builds frustration and anxiety. But they also understand that the dilemma isn’t the pro-democracy movement’s fault. The people see that pressure from Beijing has closed in, sidelining many of us.

No end’s in sight for a decade-old travel ban that prevents high-profile democrats from visiting the Chinese mainland. The ban was imposed to remind the Hong Kong people that certain individuals are persona non grata. To Beijing’s annoyance, the banned democrats kept getting re-elected, exposing the Central Government as out of touch with the public. Pro-democracy political parties may struggle to raise funds, but they survive.

Some Hong Kong people say that fighting for democracy under Chinese rule amounts to asking for the impossible. Yet many supporters still expect us to battle on with dignity and determination.

Considering the tumultuous developments in recent years and the massive mobilizations to express public views, I’m confident that the Hong Kong people remain determined and ready to use their wisdom and ingenuity to achieve democracy. They’ll dismiss small-circle elections with disdain.

Apart from manipulating Hong Kong elections, the mainland authorities have become very involved in local affairs. Under the Basic Law, the Central Government handles Hong Kong’s foreign affairs and defence, fitting the former leader Deng Xiaoping’s concepts of “one country, two systems” and allowing Hong Kong “a high degree of autonomy”.

Initially, Beijing didn’t interfere much, probably because the international community watched closely and because the Central Government held confidence in Mr Tung. Once that confidence waned after the massive march on July 1, 2003, Beijing took a much closer interest in Hong Kong affairs.

When Chinese president Hu Jintao succeeded Jiang Zemin (who had appointed Mr Tung), the newcomer held no wish to keep an inept CE. In March 2005, Mr Tung was forced to “resign”.

As a replacement, Beijing handpicked Mr Tsang, then the number-two person in Hong Kong’s government. Despite high popularity ratings, Mr Tsang lacks political friends. Without sway in Legco, he relies on mainland officials to apply pressure and secure votes for him.

Knowing Mr Tsang’s dependence on Beijing for political support, many business people keen to get things done simply approach Beijing. This creates the pathetic sight of Hong Kong people tragically damaging the “high degree of autonomy” by inviting Beijing’s interference.

On December 20, 2006, I moved a motion in Legco calling on the Central Government to stop meddling in Hong Kong’s internal affairs and urging Hong Kong officials to stand up to defend the promised autonomy. As expected, the motion failed when pro-Beijing legislators insisted there’s no interference.

Tam Yiu-chung, a vice-chairman of a pro-Beijing party, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, accused me of mounting a smear campaign to besmirch Beijing’s reputation. Another pro-Beijing Legco member didn’t speak in the debate but voted against my motion and then told me privately that he had stayed silent to avoid telling lies.

It’s a fait accompli that on March 25 the small circle of 800 business and professional people will “elect” Mr Tsang as Hong Kong’s next CE. Some people hope that once holding a new mandate Mr Tsang may show a firmer resolve to fight for the people’s interests. This is wishful thinking.

Viewing the thorny road ahead, we must brace for a tough struggle to preserve our free lifestyles and to fight for democratic government. As always, the price to preserve our liberty is eternal vigilance.

ARCHIVES

In Hong Kong, China's influence dominates.


Democracy hopes: jammed in traffic?


China's flag outflaps Hong Kong's rumpled one.