Let’s Talk
Democracy and Hong Kong’s Constitutional Reform

 

An Imaginary Dialogue between Two Hong Kong Citizens

 

Prologue

 

Visionary Kong:             The government recently released the Green Paper on Constitutional
Development. What do you think of it?

Pragmatist Hong:            What do I think?! What can I think?  

Honestly, I don’t think Hong Kong’s destiny is in our hands, certainly not in the hands of street-level Hong Kong people, like you and me! We have been demanding democracy for more than 20 years. How much democracy have we achieved?

The Green Paper pointedly says that “the number of LegCo seats returned by direct geographical elections increased from 20 in 1998 to 24 in 2000, and to 30 in 2004. The proportion of seats returned by direct geographical elections has been increased by 50% in the seven years since reunification, and accounts for half of all 60 seats in LegCo.” (para 1.08) Seems it wants us to feel that there has been a big leap in democratization in Hong Kong. What a bad joke!  

Direct elections to the District Councils, formerly District Boards, started in 1982. Hong Kong people have been exercising their voting rights and experimenting with democracy for a quarter of a century. Why are we not capable of choosing our Chief Executive and legislators? I wonder how serious the Green Paper is about building democracy in Hong Kong! 

Visionary Kong:              Serious or not is not the main issue.  

The Green Paper provides us with an opportunity to deepen the local discourse on democratic governance. While individual street-level people may not be able to significantly influence the course of events, collectively they sometimes changed the course of history. If a sufficiently large number of street-level Hong Kong people makes the same demand for a more democratic system, the critical mass assembled may contribute to a qualitative change. The July 1 protest march in 2003 is a prime example. Don’t you remember?  

A consensus among Hong Kong people, while not a sufficient condition, is nonetheless a necessary condition for any chance of a qualitative change.  

I believe such a consensus is not impossible so long as there is genuine engagement of the general public in the deliberations on building democracy in Hong Kong; a task now is to analyze the recent Green Paper and discuss issues pertinent to the ideas and practices of democracy.   

To be continued….