NDI assessment mission visits Hong Kong in July 2004 and Promise of Democratization Report 9

Assessment Mission

From 18 – 23 July 2004 the National Democratic Institute (NDI) sent an assessment mission to Hong Kong in the lead-up to the September 12 Legislative Council elections.

The assessment team comprised:

·         Casimir Yost, Director of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University;

·         Matyas Eorsi, Member of the Hungarian Parliament; 

·         Christine Chung, NDI China Program Director.

The team met with current and former government officials, including Chief Secretary Donald Tsang, Secretary for Constitutional Affairs Stephen Lam, and Electoral Affairs Commission Chairman Justice Woo, political party leaders and legislators, nongovernmental organization representatives, academics, prominent business persons and representatives of business organizations, journalists, diplomats and others.

Promise of Democratization Report 9#

The findings of this mission were documented in:

·         The Promise of Democratization in Hong Kong: The September 12, 2004 Legislative Council Elections. A Pre-election Report. NDI Hong Kong Report #9. August 31, 2004¹.

This report was written by:

·         Christine Chung.

The following people made editorial contributions to this report:

·         Casimir Yost;

·         Peter Manikas, NDI Director of Asia Programs;

·         Jennifer Ganem, NDI Senior Program Manager for Asia; 

·         Anne Tsai, NDI Program Officer for Asia.

Promise of Democratization Report 9 cover

Key findings of the mission

The key findings of this mission were:

Universal suffrage

Although the Basic Law only pledges universal suffrage as an “ultimate goal,” many people hoped that Hong Kong would move to a universal franchise for the next round of elections in 2007 and 2008 (Page 1).

However, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress’ (SCNPC) ruled in April that universal suffrage would not be established for either the 2007 or 2008 elections (Page 1)

Political rallies

On January 1, 2004, the Civil Human Rights Front organized a democracy rally in Hong Kong’s Central district. An estimated 100,000 demonstrators participated in the rally, far exceeding turnout expectations (Page 2).

February began a period of what many in Hong Kong dubbed the “Patriot Games.” For a couple of months, various Chinese officials and Hong Kong figures tried to define who in Hong Kong was a patriot and who was not, implying or openly stating that those people who were not friendly to the central authorities were not fit to lead Hong Kong. These denunciations were highlighted by personal attacks against Martin Lee, a Democratic Party (DP) legislator and former DP Chairman, who testified at the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in Washington about Hong Kong’s political situation (Page 3).

ICCPR and Meeting International Standards

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which both China and Hong Kong are signatories, guarantees the right to “genuine periodic elections” through “universal and equal suffrage.”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and numerous other human rights instruments and international agreements have similar provisions. Even before the reversion to Chinese sovereignty, Hong Kong was asked to bring its electoral law into line with the ICCPR.

In 1995, the United Nations Human Rights Committee called on the Hong Kong government to take immediate steps to comply with the ICCPR. In November 1996, the President of the United Nations Human Rights Committee condemned the failure of the Hong Kong government to respond to its previous criticisms.

The Committee reported that the use of “functional constituencies” in Hong Kong was a special restricted franchise and therefore a breach of Article 25 of the ICCPR (Page 13).

Low level of interest and activism by university students

“Many critics still lament the low level of interest and activism by university students in Hong Kong”.

Observers ascribe this lack of civic awareness to Hong Kong’s history as a colonial entity where the British deliberately minimized civic education. While colonial attitude holdovers are not disputed, public awareness is more than a prescribed program; it is an organic process that is taking hold in the HKSAR. Nevertheless, civic education appears to be an area that has been under-resourced, and it should be addressed by the government.

More support and funding needs to be channeled to Think Tanks

Think tanks in Hong Kong are emerging and expanding in both scope and breadth. Various people mentioned to the assessment team the problem of the lack of think tanks in Hong Kong.

With varying areas and degrees of competence, Hong Kong’s think tanks include among others: Policy Research Institute, Civic Exchange, SynergyNet, Article 45 Concern Group, Hong Kong Democratic Foundation, Social and Economic Policy Institute and One Country, Two Systems Institute.

Beyond these groups are Hong Kong’s universities, whose scholars often times collaborate with these civil society organizations. Moreover, the academic institutes themselves produce research and are capable of producing more than the think tanks.

“If the development of think tanks is a priority for Hong Kong, then more support and funding needs to be channeled to these nascent groups”

(Pages 24/25).

Hong Kong citizens remain skeptical of political parties

By most accounts, Hong Kong citizens remain skeptical of political parties. Less than 1% of Hong Kong’s population has ever joined a party. Commentators from across the political spectrum have noted that the middle class, in particular, is ambivalent about parties without anyone adequately representing this group (Page 25).

References

¹The Promise of Democratization in Hong Kong: The September 12, 2004 Legislative Council Elections. A Pre-election Report. NDI Hong Kong Report #9. August 31, 2004 Link to all Promise of Democratization Reports