Editor’s note: This is the third of a four-part series on the far-reaching significance of the National Security Law for Hong Kong and the special administrative region’s electoral reforms. The four commentaries will be included in the upcoming new edition of the author’s 16-article book on the “one country, two systems” principle, which was first published in May 2020.
‘The people of Hong Kong administer Hong Kong” is a major characteristic of “one country, two systems”, which is why the central government has not sent an official to Hong Kong as the head of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government or a policy bureau since its return to the motherland. However, “the people of Hong Kong administer Hong Kong” has its own gist and limits, as does the high degree of autonomy of Hong Kong. High degree of autonomy, by definition, is not full autonomy. For the same reason “the people of Hong Kong administer Hong Kong” means Hong Kong must be administered by true patriots.
He(Deng Xiaoping) gave that answer back in 1984, meaning “one country, two systems” was given the precondition of “patriots administering Hong Kong” from the very start of this framework’s design process
Deng Xiaoping made it clear back in the day that “the people of Hong Kong administer Hong Kong” comes with a precondition, which is that Hong Kong must be administered by predominantly patriotic people. What is the criterion of a patriot? According to Deng, “patriots must respect their own nation, sincerely uphold the motherland’s resumption of the exercise of sovereign rule over Hong Kong, and do not cause harm to Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability.” He gave that answer back in 1984, meaning “one country, two systems” was given the precondition of “patriots administering Hong Kong” from the very start of this framework’s design process. Article 104 of the Basic Law of the HKSAR stipulates that the chief executive, members of the Legislative Council and other civil servants must swear allegiance to the HKSAR as well as pledge to uphold the Basic Law of the HKSAR and swear allegiance to the HKSAR upon taking office. That also embodies the principle of “patriots administering Hong Kong.”
“Governance by patriots” is a common principle observed around the world, because no country would knowingly let unpatriotic people hold the governing power of the country or a region for that matter. As a matter of fact, all countries require civil servants to swear allegiance to the state and/or constitution; and the United Kingdom has a law forbidding “traitors” from standing in parliamentary elections. For the same reason, our central government would never let unpatriotic people, much less sworn enemies of the state, seize the governing power of the HKSAR. It goes without saying that those who hold important powers and assume major responsibilities of governance must be staunch patriots.
An alarming number of anti-China subversives, including known advocates of separatism and radicalism, became lawmakers, district councilors or members of the Election Committee in the past 20 years or so. They even did not bother to hide their despicable intention to completely destroy Hong Kong by launching a set of detailed strategies to start with. They flagrantly undermined and obstructed the administration of the HKSAR, opposed the central government’s overall jurisdiction over Hong Kong and wantonly harmed the interests of Hong Kong society in their relentless attempt to seize the governing power of the SAR by grabbing the majority of seats in LegCo and the Election Committee. They took advantage of the loopholes in the old electoral system, which explains why the central authorities had to plug those loopholes by revamping the electoral system to ensure the “patriots administering Hong Kong” principle is strictly observed. Ensuring “patriots administering Hong Kong” by means of law, the core objective of the electoral system revamp, will eventually achieve the ultimate goal of perfecting a democratic electoral system best suited to Hong Kong’s intrinsic sociopolitical condition. Call it democracy with Hong Kong characteristics if you will.
The Constitution of the People’s Republic of China stipulates that the National People’s Congress holds the power and authority to make decisions regarding the special administrative region systems, such as the all-important electoral system, which is an integral part of the political system and related governance mechanisms of the SARs. The decision to improve the electoral system of the HKSAR is of course the NPC’s to make, which is exactly what happened, with great care and caution no less. In fact, the central authorities consulted representatives of Hong Kong society from all walks of life as well as the HKSAR government over this crucial legislation in order to build maximum consensus and prevent the reoccurrence of ill-advised, endless haggling that victimized Hong Kong society in the past.
The revamped electoral system of the HKSAR, with an optimized eligibility review mechanism to prevent unpatriotic individuals from entering the governance structure, not only ensures staunch patriots are elected to hold important public offices but also broadens the representativeness of the Election Committee and improves the composition of functional constituencies to better enable public participation in the best interest of society as a whole. By authorizing the Election Committee to elect the chief executive and 40 of the 90 Legislative Council members, the improved electoral system will facilitate a healthy relationship between the executive and legislative branches of the HKSAR government and ensure executive-led administration of the HKSAR for more efficient governance.
The improved electoral system does not exclude those who disagree with the HKSAR government as long as they qualify as patriots. Neither does it forfeit the ultimate goal of achieving universal suffrage in both the chief executive and LegCo elections in a gradual and orderly fashion as stipulated in the Basic Law and the NPC Standing Committee’s decisions.
The author is a veteran current affairs commentator.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
