We must resist until China gives Hong Kong a say in our future
by Joshua Wong and Emily Lim / February 24, 2017 / SCMP
Hong Kong’s leader Leung “CY” Chun-ying is preparing to leave office following a five-year term marred by allegations of corruption, controversial remarks, and unfulfilled promises. He will be the first chief executive not to serve a second term.
With elections for his successor scheduled for 26 March, what does the future hold for Hong Kong?
There are four contenders now seeking the top job.
- John Tsang Chun-wah, Leung’s former financial secretary and the current crowd favourite, has 60% of the population’s support, according to polls.
- Carrie Lam Cheung Yuet-ngor, Leung’s second-in-command, is a close second and reportedly Beijing’s favored candidate.
- Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee is the founder and chair of the pro-Beijing New People’s party. Polls show that more than 50% still oppose her election.
- Woo Kwok-hing is the final candidate. The first to launch his campaign, Woo differs from the other candidates in that he is a retired judge.
Hong Kong’s mini-constitution, the Basic Law, clearly states that the chief executive should be selected “by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures”. In 2007, Beijing further pledged that the 2017 chief executive election would be implemented by “method[s] of universal suffrage”.
Yet despite all these promises, we must ask, how legitimate is this “democratic” election for the chief executive?
A close examination of the current electoral process reveals that it will be exceedingly undemocratic. Despite the 2014 pro-democracy movement known as the Umbrella Revolution, the selection method remains the same.
The next chief executive will be chosen by a 1,200-member election committee, a body that reflects the interests of a business-driven, pro-establishment, China-friendly, and elitist group. The fact that the committee is partially made up of members appointed by the Chinese central people’s government reveals how rigged the supposedly “democratic” system is.
The result is that Hong Kong citizens are denied true universal suffrage. Leung, the outgoing leader, was nicknamed “689” to reflect the meagre number of votes he received from the election committee to make him chief executive: just 689 out of 1,200. Lacking a popular mandate, Leung went on to become vastly unpopular. A 2013 poll by the Hong Kong University showed that 55% disapproved of Leung and a mere 31% supported him. When he steps down, Leung’s legacy will be a society that is more divided than ever before.
Without universal suffrage and direct elections, Hong Kong citizens cannot expect any better this time around. No matter if it is Carrie Lam, who has come under fire for formulating plans to build a Beijing Palace Museum in Hong Kong without public consultation; John Tsang, who prioritises business interests; or pro-establishment Regina Ip, the candidates are all products of a small, inner circle of politics dominated by elitist interests. Read more…