Recession will rekindle democracy issue
Since the recent Legislative Council election is now history, we should look to the future to see whether the road for Hong Kong's democratic process looks smooth or rocky. There are many problems on the horizon. They arise largely due to the broad support for democratisation expressed by the people of Hong Kong and the unsure attitude towards that process on the mainland.
Despite predictions that support in the Legco poll for the pan-democrats would fall to under 50 per cent, the final vote for the camp was almost 60 per cent, demonstrating that the majority of Hongkongers want universal suffrage for the chief executive election. With 23 pan-democrats in the legislature, they can veto any political reform package Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen proposes for the 2012 election.
So Mr Tsang faces a major challenge: in his election campaign last year, he promised to solve the issue of universal suffrage for the chief executive poll. He cannot put off the issue until after 2012, when he leaves office. Second, since any proposal is vulnerable to a veto by Legco, it must be sincere. So what reforms would Hongkongers accept?
Expanding the Election Committee from 800 to 1,200 or 1,600 members, and turning it into a Nominating Committee that vets which candidates can run for office, would be one solution. Thereafter, candidates who pass the threshold would participate in a competitive election.
The share of votes a candidate would need from the Nominating Committee to move into the public election should not be too restrictive. Otherwise, Mr Tsang will appear to be trying to prevent any democrat from running for the position.
Discussions about political reform in Hong Kong last year suggested that the proportion of votes needed to satisfy the Nominating Committee would be between 10 per cent and 25 per cent. But a 25 per cent threshold, or allowing National People's Congress delegates to veto candidates, would smack of indirect authoritarianism and spark serious protests.
However, a modest threshold, such as 10 per cent, would allow a candidate from the Civic Party, for example, to compete. Could the mainland live with that? Some officials in Guangdong province find the Civic Party unacceptable. Trained as lawyers in England, its members are seen as a front for British interests in Hong Kong.
Second, the Civic Party is seen as little more than a repackaged Democratic Party whose members are not patriotic enough to rule Hong Kong. After all, Deng Xiaoping said that, while Hong Kong could have a high degree of autonomy, it must be governed by 'patriots'.
In a fair election, a Civic Party candidate, or someone of their political leaning, could run head to head with anyone from the pro-government camp. And, if the 60 per cent of Hongkongers who consistently favour universal suffrage give such a candidate their vote, then he or she might win.
If the mainland cannot live with such an outcome, how will Beijing prevent it? Demands that any candidate for the chief executive election would need 25 per cent of the votes in the Nomination Committee would lead to strong protests.
Hongkongers might accept a less than stellar reform package from Mr Tsang; they are a pragmatic lot. But the July 1 marches of 2003 and 2004 remain fresh in the minds of the people and leaders.
A punishing global economic downturn, combined with further slides in government popularity, will make Hongkongers reject a slow or illiberal political reform process and take to the streets. Stability is at the core of the mainland's policies; a threat to this would push Beijing to accept electoral reforms that could bring to power a leader who is not pro-government.
So, stay tuned. Hong Kong's democratic soap opera remains a show worth watching.
David Zweig is director of the Centre on China's Transnational Relations at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
