Hong Kong

Statement by the HKCTU on the struggle for universal suffrage in Hong Kong

Today on April 6, 2004, the central government finally spelled out its formal response to the democracy movement in Hong Kong. It came dressed up in a legal interpretation of two annexes to the Basic Law – our mini-constitution – but the message was simple: “Beijing’s in charge.”

The Basic Law has two annexes which are supposed to provide guidelines for political reform in Hong Kong, principally the election by universal suffrage of our Chief Executive and Legislative Council. Together, the annexes allow for both possibilities by 2007 and 2008 respectively. Countless opinion polls, three huge demonstrations of up to half a million people and many smaller protests over the last year have been ample testament to the direction that the people of Hong Kong want to move in: within the Basic Law and towards full democracy.

However, today’s ruling by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (SCNPC) – an unelected body that constitutes China’s parliament – has ruled that any proposal for political reform must have the prior approval of the central government. While this does not on paper rule out universal suffrage, it is a clear signal to the people of Hong Kong to back off. The ruling departs from both the spirit and wording of the original text of the Basic Law which says nothing about prior approval by Beijing. Instead, the relevant clauses state quite clearly that political reform must be agreed by two thirds of the legislative, obtain the approval of the Chief Executive and be “reported to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress for the record.”

HKCTU’s general secretary Lee Cheuk-yan condemned the ruling as a “reality check” for all those who want to see full democracy in Hong Kong and who entertained illusions that the central government would allow it. Brother Lee said that “[E]ver since the people of Hong Kong put the demand for universal suffrage on the map in the summer of 2003, we have witnessed the ‘one country, two systems’ formula being bent to suit the political requirements of the central government – rather than the aspirations of the Hong Kong people. Where is the high degree of autonomy promised in the Basic Law now?”

Behind the SCNPC’s interpretation is a deep-seated anxiety and distrust of genuine parliamentary democracy. Hopes that the new leadership in Beijing will allow Hong Kong the autonomy to develop into a democratic society after so many years of colonialism are being rapidly buried. The central government is clearly far more concerned that progress towards democracy in Hong Kong will threaten its authoritarian rule on the mainland. For HKCTU this is a profound disappointment. An opportunity for Hong Kong to provide a template for democratic change in China, and at the same time stay within the ten-year timeframe for a constitutional review written into the Basic Law is being wasted. This lost opportunity has potentially immense consequences for all working people in China.

If nothing else, Beijing’s intervention has clarified the political landscape. The struggle for universal suffrage is no longer a matter for the Chief Executive or even Hong Kong’s legislature. It is between the people of Hong Kong and the central government. The latter are clearly playing hard ball. HKCTU will work hard with our partners in Hong Kong’s democracy movement to work for an appropriate response.

-----------

HKCTU, 6 April 2004