Hong Kong

Hong Kong Elections – the need for proper democracy

The elections on 12 September have been heralded as a litmus test for democracy in Hong Kong. Billed as the most democratic elections in Hong Kong’s history, the outcome is being seen as a test for the public’s desire for wider democracy and the implementation of one-man one vote.

However despite the hyperbole, any post election analysis must take into consideration Hong Kong’s own brand of “democracy”. This year’s election was the most democratic because it had half of the 60 seats for Legco up in direct elections – the other 30 seats however remain in the hands of the “functional Constituencies”, seats that are almost entirely held by pro business and pro government candidates. Functional Constituencies were created by the British Colonial authorities in the last years of colonial administration as a way of meeting demands for more democracy and at the same time allaying the fears of big business. Believing that even this was too radical, the new administration narrowed their already narrow electorate directly after handover – at the same time as dismissing the first directly elected Legco (elected in 1995 and consisting predominately of democrats) and installing their own selected “Provisional Legislature” despite international condemnation in 1997.

In the past 24 months or so there have been growing calls for democracy and the introduction of “one man, one vote”. This year’s election came in the wake of two massive demonstrations expressing dissatisfaction with the government in general and specifically to protest against the central government’s second intervention in Hong Kong’s mini constitution, the Basic Law. The central government stated that existing clauses relating to the introduction of universal suffrage expressly rule out any such moves for the 2007 elections. This somewhat semantic and profoundly biased “interpretation” of a clause, which quite obviously does not contain any such limitations, served to further highlight the growing demands for democracy emerging after the public’s battle with the proposed and now scrapped security legislation required under Article 23 of the Basic Law. The interpretation also stressed that any moves towards expanding democracy must be previously approved of by Beijing and it set the limit for the number of directly elected seats to remain equal with those seats elected by business sectors.

Despite widespread optimism from the Democratic Party that public anger at the government would result in a landslide victory, the election did not bring them all the Legco seats they had been expecting. Instead the Pro-Beijing Party the DAB, won 12 seats becoming the largest single party with the Democratic Party gaining nine seats. These 12 seats were won despite their previous drubbing from the public in the November District elections that led to the resignation of its chief, Ma Lik.

In the days following 12 September, there has been much public soul-searching within the Democratic Party (DP). While the DP has admitted to several tactical blunders which cost them seats for less well-known candidates, it remains true that the pro-democracy camp gained over 60 percent of the votes. Hardly a defeat and consistent with the point those of us arguing for universal suffrage have consistently made: The people of Hong Kong want the right to elect their own representatives and leaders, and they want it now! Indeed it is not that the public failed to translate pro-democracy feeling into voting behaviour but that the electoral system remains undemocratic and clumsy.

The complexity and inequality of a system which not only has several different forms of voting but also different constituencies shows up in the disparity of votes received by the different candidates which allowed for the less popular candidates from the pro-Beijing camp to gain seats from their rivals. Compare the 168,833 votes received by pro-democracy candidates of Andrew Cheng (DP), Emily Lau (Frontier) and Tong Ka Wah (Article 45 Concern Group) in New Territories East with the votes received by the four other successful candidates – two DAB candidates with some 95,434 total followed by the Chairman of the Liberal Party with 68,560 and the 60,925 received by veteran Trotskyist activist “long hair” Leung kwok Hung. The election of Leung itself speaks volumes for the increasing politicisation of Hong Kong and the acceptance into mainstream politics of what had previously been considered radical activism.

When one looks at the difference between functional and directly elected seats, this contrast becomes ridiculous in a “democratic system”. Over three million voters elected 30 members while the 30 functional members were elected by some 200,000 registered voters. For example; three “labour” seats were up for election and the three successful incumbents from the pro-Beijing Federation of Trade Unions had to receive only some 300 odd votes apiece to get in, while elsewhere a total of 11 of the 30 seats were in fact uncontested.

It is not so surprising then that the Democrats did not win as many seats as they hoped for. The pro-democratic camp now has 25 seats out of the 60 total – for them to have expected many more from Hong Kong’s skewed system would be perhaps overoptimistic while the majority of the functional seats remain firmly in the hands of the tycoon and the pro-government camp.

The election also saw a high number of new “celebrity” candidates standing for election – people who have been pushed into politics by the events of the past two years – for example, outspoken radio talk show host Albert Cheng or members of the Article 45 Concern Group, a disparate group of academics and lawyers who obviously believe they have a particular role to play in the post-Article 23 reversal climate of Hong Kong. These newcomers vied for votes from traditional Democratic Party supporters and helped to contribute to the failure of the Democratic Party to secure a majority, but taken together, their combined seats represent a major obstacle in the way of the DAB and Liberal pro-Beijing bloc. It remains to be seen if their newly awakened political aspirations will make them strong politicians.

Not surprisingly the election was hailed as a victory for “stability” by the China Daily News, despite the fact that the democratic camp will have a combined weight of 25 directly elected seats in Legco compared with the combined weight of the pro Beijing Dab and the pro Business Liberal Party of 22. In many states this would translate into significant power to combat pro government legislation and propose new bills. In Hong Kong however, given that all legislation submitted by Legco members must have the support of both directly elected members and the pro-government functional constituencies, such a sizeable but ineffective majority only serves to reveal just how much we need a thorough overhaul of our current “democratic system”.