Wong Kai-shing

On Sept. 10, 2000, Hong Kong held its second election since the handover for seats in the Legislative Council (Legco). The response of the electorate, however, was somewhat disappointing. The voting rate for this election for directly elected seats was 43.57 percent (1,331,080 people among 3,055,378 registered voters), 10 percent less than the 53.29 percent of the electorate (1,489,705 people among 2,795,371 registered voters) who voted in the first election in May 1998. Many people did not cast ballots this time, especially those who seemed to largely vote for pro-democracy parties or candidates in previous elections. A clear indication is the electoral support shown for the Democratic Party, the largest pro-democracy party in Hong Kong, whose support dramatically dropped by about 172,000 votes. Some of these votes went to other pro-democracy parties or even pro-China parties, but the significant loss of votes was largely due to the decline of the voting rate. This is supported by the fact that the number of votes received by the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong (DAB), the largest pro-China party in Hong Kong, was more or less the same as in the first election.

What are the implications of these election results? First of all, the results did not affect the existing distribution of seats between the pro-democracy and pro-China forces in Legco. However, the sharp decline of the voting rate shows that many people are frustrated with the present situation in Hong Kong. In the past three years, the people of Hong Kong have suffered from the Asian financial crisis. The life of the grassroots has turned harsher and harsher. The problem of poverty has become more serious. Many people have either lost their jobs or have had to work long hours for very low wages. Even people of the middle class have had a hard time. Many of them have experienced a large cut in their income or have gone into debt because of the collapse of the real estate market. As a result, people from different classes have joined public rallies on the streets to express their desperation and frustration. However, the Hong Kong government, headed by Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa, has turned a deaf ear to the voices of the people. Policies have been made to suit the interests of businessmen. At the same time, many people feel that Legco has failed to supervise the government and provide leadership in resolving the present crisis. They have no confidence in the govern-ment as well as in Legco. Consequently, they gave up their right to vote in this election.

Another implication is that many people are disappointed with the performance of the pro-democracy parties, especially the Democratic Party. Many people have an impression that the Legco members of the pro-democracy camp only know how to criticize the government. Under the difficult economic situation in Hong Kong, the main concern of people is their livelihood. The pro-democracy parties have not provided a clear vision for people concerning the future of Hong Kong. They have also failed to propose any feasible solutions to solve the problems related to people's livelihood. Legco members from the pro-democracy parties have concentrated too much on their work within Legco and have neglected to build strongholds among the people to support their political agendas.

Meanwhile, with its large financial resources, strong organizational support from pro-China trade unions and local district associations and a good relation-ship with the government, the DAB is more capable in providing direct local services for people to help them solve their day-to-day problems. As a result, the DAB has been able to maintain a large number of loyal supporters whose votes to the party are largely 'guaranteed.' This is why even when it became public knowledge that Cheng Kai-nam, the vice chairperson of the DAB, had abused his position as a Legco member by passing a confidential govern-ment document to a business associate and had not declared his interest in one of his two public relations firms after the 1998 election that the votes for the DAB were not greatly affected in these polls.

There is a determining factor, however, leading to the growing frustration of people with the present political situation. This is the so-called 'executive-led' political system imposed on Hong Kong by the Basic Law, Hong Kong's mini-Constitution. Under this system, Hong Kong's people have no way to hold government officials accountable for their actions and are discouraged from participating in political actions. In Hong Kong's executive-led system, political power is centralized with the chief executive, and he or she selects other senior officials, but the chief executive is not elected by the people through universal and equal suffrage. Hong Kong's present chief executive, Tung Chee-hwa, was only elected by a 400-member Selection Committee. The next chief executive will be elected by only an 800-member Election Committee in 2002.

At the same time, people cannot depend on Legco to supervise the government under the 'executive-led' system. In this election, for instance, only 24 among 60 seats in Legco were directly elected by geographical constituencies. Half of the members were elected by functional constituencies, an electoral system which grants more voting rights to people of the professional and business sectors. The remaining six members were elected by an 800-member Election Committee whose composition replicated the pattern of the functional constituencies. As a result, the majority of seats in Legco went to the pro-China and pro-business parties and candidates. Most of the time these Legco members will stand by the govern-ment and support its policies and views.

Another problem is that the Basic Law imposes a highly unfair voting procedure on Legco: the passage of motions, bills or amendments introduced by individual Legco members to government bills requires a simple majority vote by each of two groups of members present. One group comprises the members returned by functional constituencies; another group is composed of the members returned by geographical constituencies through direct elections and by the Election Committee. However, the passage of bills introduced by the government only requires a simple majority vote of the members of Legco present. As a result, it becomes very difficult for individual members to see their motions, bills or amendments to government bills successfully pass. Moreover, Article 74 of the Basic Law provides power for the chief executive to reject the introduction of bills from Legco members that touch on government policies. With all of these obstacles, Legco members find it very difficult to put their ideas into real policies.

Does the result of the election mean a setback of the democratic development of Hong Kong? Apparently Yes, for the sharp decline of the voting rate can be interpreted as an indication that Hong Kong's people do not attach great importance to their voting rights. This seems to be true. However, it does not mean that Hong Kong's people are not aware of their democratic rights and not longing for democracy. In fact, many people did not bother to vote as they felt that the present political system could not reflect their will. What the result of the election has shown is the dissatisfaction of people with the present undemocratic political system. At the same time, the result shows that people demand a high quality of political leadership from the pro-democracy parties. They do not want political parties which only know how to shout the slogans of democracy or to accuse each other. They want political parties which really care about their rights and day-to-day livelihood.

The pro-democracy parties in Hong Kong have to reflect on the meaning of democracy for the people. Democracy not only means direct election of the government and the legislature; democracy also means the participation and empowerment of people in determining their destiny. Therefore, apart from running election campaigns and debating in Legco, the pro-democracy parties have to work at the grassroots to promote the participation of the people in social discourse and empower people to assert their rights. It is important to integrate people's aspirations for democracy with the concern of people for a better livelihood. The struggle for democracy is only meaningful to people when it is related to their daily life. The pro-democracy parties also have to develop active strategies and feasible alternatives to the present problems through an intensive dialogue with the people.

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the Church also play a very important role in promoting democracy. In particular, they have to create a space for discussion and participation which allows people to share their opinions and ideas about the present situation in Hong Kong and their aspirations for the future. Modern forms of communication, such as the Internet, can be used to promote such an exchange of people's views. We should build up a vision for the future of Hong Kong through mutual dialogue and participation among the people. As a whole, the result of this election demands from us a deeper reflection about the meaning of democracy and people's participation in Hong Kong.