Opinion | Electoral reform in Hong Kong shines a light on its disordered representation on CE and LegCo floors

By Sy Hon Ming Edmond

Not long after the PRC Government announced the "patriotic election" decision in response to the previously disordered Legislative Council Election, a new electoral resolution was approved by Beijing on March 11. The National People's Congress (NPC) has decided to reduce the "democratic representation" to allow the "patriotic panel" taking over candidates' first milestone on the road to becoming the Chief Executive.

The forthcoming reduction on directly elected seats is Beijing's latest move to secure Hong Kong, shielding it from those candidates who support violent riots or oppose the authority. With police's continuous effort and legal prosecution taking place, many have reckoned that the 2019 protest ambiance is done, a dead end. Yet, few who wish to shatter Hong Kong's social security still scheme to reach such irrational goals by participating in the LegCo election, hence dismantling the Chief Executive election. Therefore, the new electoral reform became robust, also supported by national mastery, implementation to terminate this disarray.

Zhang Xiaoming, deputy director of the State Council's Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office (HKMAO), said he longed for a deep and constructive discourse about the plan's core instead of announcing the details plainly. However, he reckoned that the expected conversation should not deviate from the framework decided by the national legislature last week.

Many argue the proposed terms would disrupt the One Country Two Systems crux, targeting the question on "democracy" and "freedom of expression". As a matter of fact, what Beijing has introduced last week is anything but jeopardizing Hong Kong's electoral freedom. The reforms are for rectifying the shortfalls and amending the systemic loopholes of the existing electoral process, as stated by Paul Chan Mo-po, the financial secretary of HKSAR government. He also pointed out the reform would prevent the separatist forces from manipulating Hong Kong's political development. His words are simple, but highly accurate.

Similarly, the political progress of Hong Kong did not initiate from the "five-step process" thoroughly. In 1990, the original system was to be a three-step progress, as set out by the Basic Law. That being - (1) Approved by ⅔ of the Legislative Council members; (2) Approved by the Chief Executive; and (3) reported to the Standing Committee of the Nation People's Congress.

As the NPC passed the bills of the Interpretation by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress of Article 7 of Annex I and Article III of Annex II to the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China ("2004 Interpretation") and the Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress on Issues Relating to the Methods for Selecting the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and for Forming the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the Year 2012 and on Issues Relating to Universal Suffrage adopted by the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress at its Thirty-first Session in 2007, the commonly known "five-step" electoral campaign was then settled, with the addition of (1) the Chief Executive to make a report to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress ("NPCSC"), so as to invite the NPCSC to decide whether it is necessary to amend the method of selection; (2) the NPCSC to make a determination on whether any amendment to the method of selection may be made.

It comes clear now that the "five-step" campaign is not the sole ultimatum to determine Hong Kong's electoral system or progress our political development. Like many countries and districts in the world, it is merely an option. According to the Constitution and Basic Law, the PRC government owns the final decision to determine or amend the aforementioned policies. Annex 1 and 2, as well as the "2004 Interpretation by NPC" lay out the legal foundation for such approach. Noticeably is, with Beijing and Hong Kong's officials actively seeking a practical outcome to resolve the electoral bewilderment, the progress is adhered to continuous social disarrays. To efficiently and successfully actualize the vision, Beijing owns the duty to execute its sovereign power to complete Hong Kong's electoral system.

Integrated with the proposed "patriots ruling Hong Kong" principle, it is fair to say the new electoral reform does not only help achieving veritable One Country Two Systems, but also marks the promise that Beijing has given to Hong Kongers. Just with extra defense and caution on blocking out the unpatriotic, which is on every citizen's mind.

The author is a graduate of Law School, Tsinghua University, and One Country Two System Youth Forum Research Assistant.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.