Vote threatens China’s grip on Hong Kong
The Guardian
September 6 2004
http://www.guardian.co.uk/editor/story/0,12900,1302991,00.html
PS. According to this article, electoral system was indeed set up by the British. Which is so ridiculous because Britain and all other former colonies use the first past the post system.
Also: on Open Democracy
Hong Kong’s democratic road: an interview with Christine Loh
http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-10-83-2093.jsp
Vote threatens China’s grip on Hong Kong
Hong Kong went to the polls yesterday in legislative council elections that were seen as the most important since the handover to China in 1997
Monday September 13, 2004
The Guardian
How does the electoral system work?
Hong Kong’s byzantine electoral system was devised by the British to limit the influence of democracy advocates under colonial rule, and it continues to do so under Chinese rule. Industries, professions and other groups choose half the 60 seats in the legislature…the 30 remaining seats will be chosen…by geographical constituency this year…But to limit the dominance of democracy advocates, the territory has been divided into five large, multi-seat districts. A system of proportional representation is used…for each of these districts, so a party can capture a seat even if it wins as little as one-tenth of the vote.
Keith Bradsher in the New York Times, September 6
Who are the major parties and how are they viewed?
The main pro-Beijing party, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong…[has] a long history of subservience to the party line, dating back to the Cultural Revolution… Meanwhile, the democratic camp is vulnerable to the accusation that its policies on issues other than the constitution and autonomy from Beijing are either imprecise or aimed more at above-average earners.
Philip Bowring in the International Herald Tribune, September 10
Why were the elections important?
[There has been] a dramatic rise in the stakes in Hong Kong politics since July 1 last year when 500,000 people took to the streets to protest against the administration of Beijing-appointed Tung Chee-hwa…That “people-power” demonstration – followed by another one on July 1 this year – has alarmed China.
From the Deutsche Presse-Agentur, September 10
Why are Hong Kong’s democrats angry?
Beijing stipulated [on April 26] that…Hong Kong cannot pick its chief executive by direct elections in 2007 and cannot expand direct elections for its legislative council in 2008. The decision…outraged many…who had hoped to move swiftly along the path to full democracy. It gave rise to charges that the Communist leadership in Beijing was not being faithful to its promises of broad autonomy and “one country, two systems” made…in 1997.
Edward Cody in the Washington Post, August 11
What has been Beijing’s response to the protests?
Over the past 14 months it has intervened more openly than ever to take control of Hong Kong’s political development and has created the most poisonous political atmosphere in the territory in many years…Pro-democracy politicians have had their offices vandalised and smeared with faeces.
Ellen Bork in the New York Sun, September 9
How do China’s opponents feel about the elections?
Every single vote against Beijing is an embarrassment to the great dictators sitting in their communist eyries spinning their webs of deceit, oppression and tyranny…The election outcome will not alter the rule of law in Hong Kong. But even holding an election is a triumph if the residents of Hong Kong realise there is so much power in their participation and so much hope if they send the right message to the world.
Lee Long-hwa in the Taipei Times, September 12
What is at stake, in practical terms?
Hong Kong reverted to Chinese rule in 1997 and the legislative chamber has been dominated by pro-China members ever since 1997. Analysts say any upset of that arrangement would dilute Beijing’s control over the city, possibly paralysing legislation. An independent opinion poll late on Saturday gave about 41% support to the democrats, 24% to the pro-Beijing camp and as many as 35% still undecided.
From CNN.com, September 12
Was the turnout high?
In the most extensive exercise in democracy in China…a record 3.2 million voters registered to take part…Polls showed turnout as high as 53-57%, up from 43.5% in 2000, as the democrats’ campaign for votes for all has galvanised residents…By 11.30am [yesterday] turnout was 11.58%, compared with 9.61% in 2000, election commission figures showed. A high turnout is seen as favouring the pro-democracy forces.
From the Reuters newswire, September 12
Yan Sham-Shackleton Online 
You’ll be relieved to know that this information is completely wrong. (And if you look more closely, you can see that it was the New York Times that got it wrong, not the Guardian. Naturally.)
Anyway, the current proportional representation system was introduced by the Provisional (and entirely unelected) Legislative Council after the real Legislative Council was disbanded on July 1, 1997.
Here’s a quote from the House of Commons report on the subject:
“… for 1998, there are significant changes in the electoral arrangements for each category of seat. Thus, in the geographical constituencies, first-past-the post voting in 20 single seat constituencies has been replaced by a list-based system of proportional representation with five multi-seat constituencies.”
The link to the report is: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmfaff/710/71004.htm
Cheers,
Mark
LikeLike
A simple google search of “hong kong electoral system” too, does wonders. For instance, http://www.democracy.org.hk/pastweek/dec13_19/hrm_report.htm. And http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3190604. Or http://www.cityu.edu.hk/cityutoday/news/category/outreach/publications/n20031119_02.htm.
LikeLike
Thanks!! Luckily I have shelved the electoral system column for next month and concentrating on the political subtext of Wong Kar Wai’s 2046 instead. I know it wasn’t going to float, better back off and give myself time.
Anyone else got links, books, references? Much apreciated!
LikeLike
2046! Hmmm. I am a big fan of Wong Kar Wai’s In the Mood for Love. And Chungking Express. But the earlier stuff escapes me.
LikeLike
Proportional representation is quite simply the most pathetic system ever invented, unless you get a majority outright then you have to team up with your oponents in order to govern, and this means that yuo have to put some of their policies in place or water down your own ones until they meet everybodies standards, by which time they’re usesless.
Add to this that Beijing has riggeed things so that it will always have sufficient seats to over turn anything that it doesn’t like and you’ve got yourself one country one system.
Thatcher should have given HK nukes not the Basic law, lets see Beijing reinterprit a few ICBMs.
LikeLike
Proportional Representative system is not actually the most pathetic system ever invented, many believe that it’s actually the true way to show represent the people by the number of votes.
Some feel that first past the post system which a person outright wins, is unfair as you can have an extreme close call such as the Gore/bush “win” and many of those electors become voiceless and proportional representation is a way to reprimand that.
HOWEVER the way it is done in Hong Kong is somewhat different and an antithisis of that idea. But exactly HOW.. everyone talks about how it’s rigged, and how it’s unfair, but the details are never explained. I seek to understand it, for myself first and if I can write about it even better. I can reel off the same stuff everyone else can reel off too.
And no thatcher should not have given HK nukes, she should have given us independence. Oh, but she wouldn’t have because she wanted us for herself.
Lates
Yan
LikeLike