liberal studies society newsletter issue 1

LSS Newsletter Issue 1 November 2014

Constitutional Development in Hong Kong

831 Chief Executive Election Framework What is going on?

Quiz Time

Prizes are waiting for you!

;


2

Content Page Number(s)

831 Chief Executive Election Framework

3-4

Analysis of the Framework 5-6

Occupy Central Movement 7-11

Previous Proposals 12-16

Quiz Time 17

Content Page

;


3

On 31 August 2014, the Tenth Session of the Standing Committee of the Twelfth National People's Congress set limits for the 2017 Chief Executive (CE) election.

What is the framework of the decision?

What is the legal foundation?

Basic Law Article 45

"The Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government."

"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 nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures."

831 Chief Executive Election Framework

;


4

What is the source of power and effect of NPCSC’s decisions?

According to the interpretation of NPCSC on Hong Kong Basic Law Art.7 of Annex1 and Art.3 of Annex 2 in 2004, the following five steps have to be followed if the election method of the CE or the Legislative Council (LegCo) has to be amended.

The power of interpretation is granted by article 158 which states the power of final interpretation of the Basic Law is vested in the NPCSC.

William Wong 4A

;


5

It is inevitable that a higher degree of democracy is exhibited in the nature of the Chief Executive election in 2017. Compared to the election in 2012 which restricted both the nomination and election processes to take place in the unpopularly-elected Election Committee, the proposal for 2017 has incorporated universal suffrage in the election process. The definition of democracy from the Central Government’s point of view is that everyone has the right to vote, so the proposed election method has fulfilled the requirement already. It can be regarded as a step forward made by the central authorities in the development of democracy in Hong Kong, functioning in accordance with the principal of “gradual and orderly progress” in Basic Law. For developed countries like France, Ireland and Taiwan, specific thresholds are still set up to filter certain inappropriate nominations of candidates. Therefore, Hong Kong’s indirect nomination process can be partially justified and the democratic elements in the election process should be noted.

The decision aims at allowing smooth administration. To begin with, the opinions of different sectors including economic, political, cultural and professions, are taken into account. The Nomination Committee is functionally-based, having a balanced participation and broad representation of people from all walks of life. The views of various sectors can be pondered and reflected in the policy-making of the government, thus increasing the legitimacy of the government. Another factor contributing to the happening of smooth administration is the ensuring of intimate relationship between the Chief Executive and the Central government. Through the screening in the nomination process, the Chief Executive must be someone who “loves the country and loves Hong Kong”. Revolutions against the central authority can be avoided and so does foreign affiliation, which poses national security challenges to the country itself. Effective and smooth communication is enforced between the central government and Hong Kong.

The aforementioned are the theoretically positive effects of the decision of the NPCSC. Nevertheless, criteria set by the NPCSC are casting public doubts on whether the initial objective of increasing the level of democracy to Hong Kong’s political system can be achieved. Disputes arise when people are aware that there will not be any improvement made in the democratic level of the political system as long as universal suffrage is not implemented in the election process.

Analysis of the Decision--Pros

Michelle Wong 5G

;


6

While the decision made by NPCSC is highly endorsed by the Central Government as well as the pro-establishment camp, controversies have been stirred. Political screening is one of the main concerns. The NPCSC has announced on 31st August that the Chief Executive chosen by the universal suffrage must “love the country and love Hong Kong”. Potential candidates also have to gain support from more than half of the Nominating Committee, making the threshold of being a Chief Executive candidate more challenging. This prerequisite has created controversies over the possibility of candidates not favoured by the Beijing government being nominated. It has long been known that pan-democrats are usually labelled as anti-China by the Central Government, therefore the prerequisite of “love the country and love Hong Kong” is regarded as the Central Government’s way to screen out candidates who may not support all of Central Government’s decisions. The definition of “love the country and love Hong Kong” is currently still being debated back-and-forth between people of different camps and parties. Some cannot help but question China’s definition of “love the country”. Should an equal sign be put between “love the country” and “love the party”? Should potential candidates have close relationships with Central Government to become a candidate?

Apart from the abovementioned problems, the decision has also imposed a question on whether a universal suffrage with a pre-selection is a universal suffrage at all. Most say no, as they believe that the meaning of democracy is betrayed. Democracy has long been a core value in Hong Kong, and citizens feel that it is threatened by the NPCSC’s decision. “True universal suffrage” is demanded, and the decision has left citizens dissatisfied and angry, as they think that their promised universal suffrage is not delivered.

With the screening mechanism and the prerequisite of “Love China, Love Hong Kong”, citizens might argue that the coming Chief Executive Election method is not true universal suffrage, and is potentially a worse off election method than our current one. Other election methods have been proposed, for example, civic nomination by Scholarism, but are yet to be acknowledged by the Central Government. The legitimacy of the future Chief Executive may very well be undermined with such opposition towards the NPCSC’s decision, affecting the efficiency and authority of the government. With all the aforementioned disadvantages, it is hardly surprising that citizens react badly upon the news.

Analysis of the Proposal--Cons

Emily Ha 5H

;


7

NPCSC’s decision regarding the Chief Executive Election in 2017 has stirred heated debate

in Hong Kong. On 28th September, 2014, Occupy Central (originally planned to begin on 1st

October, 2014) began. Instead of literally occupying Central, major roads in Admiralty,

Mongkok, and Causeway Bay districts have been blocked for weeks upon weeks. At the

height of the protests, thousands of students, protesters, politicians and ordinary civilians

took to the streets to push the government for responding to their demand for genuine

democracy. Class and work boycotts have also been initiated by protesters to showcase their

angst and dissatisfaction towards bogus democracy put forward by the NPCSC. Here is

what our students think about the Movement.

Occupy Central Movement

;


8

Adrian Kwong 4H

I am inclined to support the actions of current protesters occupying key roads in Hong Kong. The mobilisation of masses in favour of democracy has played historically a key role in democratisation, especially in multiple European and Latin American states. Such mobilisation can raise acceptance of emancipative values and pressure elites into concession. By contrast, most democracies liberalised by direction from above such as Russia or some African states have since deteriorated into autocracy. Hence, I am inclined to support Occupy Central as a means for demanding democracy.

I support democracy for Hong Kong in the sense that political competition is unrestricted as such a form of competition enables politicians to be directly responsible to the electorates, not to smaller minorities. This would incentivise the provision of public goods, such as the rule of law and good governance, as well as merit goods such as healthcare; by contrast, a leader dependent on a smaller Nomination Committee for political support would be inclined to provide private goods to such people.

Anson Lau 5G

Universal suffrage in Hong Kong has been the most controversial issue recently. In my opinion, I think it is justifiable for Occupy Central to take place.

Firstly, as legal and obliged Hong Kong citizens, we own the rights and freedoms which are included in the Basic Law. For example, we have freedom of speech and right to protest. Therefore, it is definitely justifiable for us to express our opinions.

Secondly, we are, or will be the major pillars of the society in the future as we will contribute most to the societal development. As citizens, we also have the obligation to fight for justice whilst maintaining peace and stability. As expressing our opinions may make our society a better place, it is justifiable for us to express views, including discontent to the government.

;


9

Christie Pang 4H

Many people believe that civil disobedience is the best way to convey their dissatisfactory towards the government and strive for changes. Indeed, when you look at the history, many revolutions did succeed by civil disobedience which involved innumerable sacrifices of sweat and blood. Yet we have to be conscious of why the people back then had to launch revolutions — society back then was a hierarchy, and as education was not accessible in the past, many people were not knowledgable and some of them were even illiterate. They did not have the ability to be an influential power in the society thus civil disobedience became their only way to change their future. Nowadays, in a knowledge-based society, all of us are capable of being a leader. We should cherish and make use of our privilege of being born in the generation of knowledge, to study hard and use our knowledge to change the fortune of our community. While urging for the society’s improvements, we also have to improve the way we strive.

Becky Fong 5D

Controversies over the universal suffrage of the Chief Executive in 2017 have been stirred in Hong Kong recently. Being responsible global citizens and critical thinkers, we are no doubt involved in this serious political issue, which will affect our future as well as the future of Hong Kong. Yet, is it really justifiable for secondary school students to boycott school and participate in Occupy Central? To a large extent, I disagree with this statement.

Students should act according to their identity as learners. School is a place for learning, not for shadowing politics. I am not saying that students should not/ cannot have their political views and opinions. However, are students mature enough to think thoroughly before they act? I have reservations. Some may argue that all we are taking Liberal Studies, which makes us all-rounded to understand the whole situation. Yet, without sufficient life experience, I think secondary school students are still not experienced enough to make their own decisions. Attending Occupy Central and hence boycotting school simply does no good to students as this may affect their learning.

Boycotting classes is definitely not the best option for expressing students’ political views. There are many alternatives to express political opinions. For instance, students can write blogs online and share their views and discuss with others. In this way, not only can students voice out their views, they can also get to know people with different mindset and can understand political issues more comprehensively through critical discussions.

All in all, expressing our political views by joining Occupy Central is not a justifiable act. I sincerely hope all students can think holistically and consider the impacts their actions will bring and step into different parties' shoes before taking any actions.

;


10

Natalie Fung 5G

Democracy—a dream we have been chasing after for a whopping 17 years. Since the handover of Hong Kong, we have had tremendous faith in the Central Government for introducing genuine democracy in Hong Kong. However, it seems that the Government has recently deceived us by putting us into a “trap” of bogus democracy, of democracy which has political screening and of democracy which is prejudiced and distorted. It is because of this sole reason that Occupy Central has been initiated and continued by ever-increasing Hong Kong citizens.

Personally, I am extremely supportive of such a movement as it comprehensively makes our voices heard to the Government. By sitting on roads, sleeping in tents, drawing on streets and creating inspiring arts, our will to have authentic democracy is holistically exhibited to the Government. It is hoped that such solidarity can alter the Government’s decision, which has in effect betrayed our faith. Indeed, we used to trust the Central Government, believing that we would have democracy someday. Yet the decision of NPCSC is a far cry from what we truly demand. We, Hong Kongers, united and proud would like to have genuine democracy,

which has no political filtering of any candidates, who are meant to be accountable to electorates i.e. general public in lieu of only a few individuals.

It is true that Occupy Central may incur such adverse consequences as economic distress, but we Hong Kongers are united and altogether we say “NO” to “fake democracy” proposed by NPCSC. The so-called “negativities” are simply some sacrifices we have to make towards the path of realising democracy. Democracy is our ultimate aim and we are trying to achieve it no matter what the cost is.

Hong Kong, go for it!

Audrey Chan 5J

As I view as the Occupy Central Movement as being ineffectual in producing any immediate change to Hong Kong’s political situation, I do not support this movement. Considering the goal of the movement being using public pressure from Hong Kong citizens to induce the revocation of the reform package, I do not find it to be a success. Firstly, the portion of the Hong Kong population that is participating in the movement is very small. Thus, it is arguably unable to represent the popular opinion of Hong Kong. This fact is an opportunity for attack against Hong Kong’s desire to be democratic as the Central Government as well as the Chief Executive could contrive a conclusion that not all Hong Kong citizens desire universal suffrage as the movement does not see a 100% participation rate. The very small scale of the protest renders it powerless to alarm the Central Government. Secondly, the movement is not only ineffective in changing the political situation, but also detrimental to citizens’ life. The congested roads and diverted transport routes are inconvenient to citizens, and the city’s economy has also declined since the movement.

;


11

Tang Hei Yung—3G

Occupy Central has continued for more than 3 weeks. It has assembled tremendous number of citizens to participate. Basically its aim is to force the Beijing and Hong Kong government alter its implementation of so-called “universal suffrage” for the Chief Executive election in 2017 by blocking major roads and paralysing Hong Kong.

To me, universal suffrage is a wish that I, along with fellow Hong Kongers, have been dreaming for many years. However, I am sure not everyone agrees with the method of Occupy Central. In general, those who support Occupy Central think that in a democratic place like Hong Kong, we should have our rights to nominate and vote for the person we support. On the contrary, for the anti-Occupy Central protestors, they think that it is not appropriate to threaten the economy, which is a major pillar Hong Kong relies on. In addition, the movement may be thought to be useless as it is impossible to change the decision made by the Central Government.

To a certain extent, they both make sense; the main difference is merely their priority setting. For supporters of Occupy Central, they put democracy in the first place. Yet, for those who oppose the movement, they think economic development and stability of the society is more worthwhile.

Under politics, there is no definite right or wrong regarding each issue. There must be pros and cons, it really depends on where you stand. Therefore do not be afraid to voice out your views and let us see what will happen sooner or later.

Chloe Wong—4A

What’s the meaning of justice? What’s the rational yet powerful way of pursuing democracy? Thanks to recent events like occupying central and boycotting classes, it’s time to train our critical thinking skills.

To decide if the event is successful, we should first look at the starting point or the major aim of the event. If you consider the aim to be showing Hong Kongers’ passion for democracy and to raise global awareness, you may say that the event is successful. From all the international news or magazines such as Times, BBC, we can see that Hong Kong’s ‘peaceful protestors’ are bringing the whole issue under spotlight, hence achieving the goal of raising global awareness.

However, if you consider the aim as giving pressure to the Central Government so as to change the entire policy, you may argue that the event is pointless. Since if the event really succeeded in achieving this goal, Hong Kong would gain ‘true’ democracy and there would be a chance of affecting China’s rule. People holding such a point of view, hence, will argue that the event not only adversely affects Hong Kong’s economy but is also meaningless.

We can never expect everyone to have the same idea towards the same issue. However, no matter what views you possess towards the ‘Umbrella Movement’, let us pray for Hong Kong’s future and for safety of Hong Kongers.

;


12

18 Experts Proposal

The 18 experts come from different educational institutions such as Dr. Fong Chi Hang Brian from Hong Kong Institute of Education and Dr. Law Chi Kwong from the University of Hong Kong.

Power to Nominate Candidate 1) Nomination by Nominating Committee

2) Civic Recommendation

Composition of Nominating Committee Similar to current Election Committee

Electoral Base of Nominating Committee Expansion of electoral base

Abolish corporate votes in the First, Second and Third Sectors

How to Become a Candidate 1) Civic Nomination

-Nominated by 70,000 to 10,000 registered Hong Kong voters

-Supported by 1/8 Nominating Committee

2) Nominating Committee

-Nominated by 1/8 Nominating Committee

How to Become Chief Executive Two-Round Voting System

-Require over 50% votes to be elected

*If not, another round of voting will be required

Previous Proposals

;


13

Chen Hung Yee Proposal

Mr. Chen Hung Yee is a legal specialist and a law professor in the University of Hong Kong as well as a member of the Basic Law Committee.

Power to Nominate Candidate Nominating Committee

Number of Members of Nominating Committee

1200


Electoral Base of Nominating Committee -Certain corporate votes replaced by individual votes

-Increase from about 20,000 electors to 60,000 electors

-District Councillors automatically become electors

How to Become a Candidate Two phases

1) Nominated by 1/8 Nominating Committee (As many as 8 candidates in total)

2) 5 candidates (with highest vote) can take part in CE Election

;


14

Power to Nominate Candidate Nominating Committee


1400


-300 members for each of the first three sectors

-500 members for the fourth sector (political sector)

Electoral Base of Nominating Committee 317 members in the fourth sector are elected by Hong Kong citizens

How to Become a Candidate Nominated by 1/10 Nominating Committee (Upper limit: 25%)

How to Become Chief Executive Require over 50% votes to be elected

Hong Kong 2020

Initiated by Anson Chan, the former Chief Secretary for Administration, Hong Kong 2020 is a political group aimed at fighting for genuine universal suffrage and democracy.

;


15

Alliance for True Democracy Proposal

Consisting of such political groups as the People Power, the Labour Party and the Civic Party, the major objective of the Alliance is to fight for authentic democracy in Hong Kong.

Power to Nominate Candidate Three-Channel Approach

1) Nominating Committee

2) Civil Nomination

3) Political Parties Nomination


Nil

Composition of Nominating Committee Nil

Electoral Base of Nominating Committee Nil

How to Become a Candidate 1) Direct nomination of Nominating Committee

2) Nomination from political parties which contain 5% of total effective votes

3) Nomination from 1% general public


Two-Round Voting System



;


16

Scholarism Proposal

Headed by Joshua Wong, Scholarism is a student organisation aiming to right the wrongs in society through political campaigns and activities.

Power to Nominate Candidate 1) Nominating Committee (Formed by directly elected Legco Members)

2) Civil Nomination


Nil

Composition of Nominating Committee Abolition of four sectors

Electoral Base of Nominating Committee Directly elected by the general public

How to Become a Candidate 1) Not less than 8% endorsement of Nominating Committee (Upper limit: 20%)

2) Support from at least 1% Hong Kong registered voters (35,000 voters); Nominating Committee has no veto power


Two-Round Voting System



Natalie Fung 5G

Joanne Tsang 5G

;


17

Quiz Time

1. When did the NPCSC set the framework for Chief Executive Election in 2017?

2. Identify one advantage and one drawback of the framework made by the NPCSC.

3. Name one organisation which proposes civil nomination for Chief Executive Election.

4. When was Occupy Central Movement originally planned to start?

Do you know the answers to the questions?

If yes, please send your answers to Fung Chi Ying Natalie 5G (14) by 19/12/2014.

liberal studies society newsletter issue 1

Documents