26-NOV-1992
4
འ
12:33
BRITISH TRADE COMM
P.09
n reality, the prospects for significant political independence from Beijing are limited. As aid out in the Basic Law, LEGCO will continue the weak role it has played under the colonial government. Legislative initiative is constrained by complex rules on voting and executive consent, while authority over appointments or dismissals of civil servants is minimal. LEGCO in theory has authority to impeach the Chief Executive, but the procedure is complex and unlikely to be used. Under the terms of the Basic Law. the LEGCO can meanwhile be dissolved by the Chief Executive, who, though elected by a Election Committee of appointed and elected officials and members of the community. must be approved by Beijing. Finally, even though the 1995 LEGCO is in theory supposed to continue its term at the time of transition. significant discretion exists for China to influence the membership of the post-1997 legislative body. According to appended rules in the Basic law. only those members who uphold the Basic Law... and pledge allegience to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China ... become members of the First Legislative Council."
Why then is China concerned? Although these proposals largely conform to the letter of the Basic Law - or at least offer suggestions for some of the grey areas within the document - the more forceful public support for democratic process by the Governor has led to accusations by Beijing that Britain is abandoning the "spirit" of previous Sino-British agreements. In China's mind, Britain's concern for democratic participation in Hong Kong and calls for greater democracy from HK people themselves are a relatively new phenomenon that has come in the wake of Tiananmen. Prior to 1989, Sino-British relations were relatively smooth and the two sides' perspectives were largely harmonious. Britain's more vocal public concern for the political future of the Hong Kong people is thus viewed by China as a sign of distrust and an attempt to undermine Chinese sovereignty over the territory in 1997.
In addition, China is concerned about the loss of control associated with some degree of political decentralisation. China perhaps was more willing to accord Hong Kong some degree of political autonomy in the post-1997 government when it meant continuation of the territory's leadership under an essentially non-democratic. non-confrontational, business-oriented elite. To Beijing's leaders, limited direct participation so far appears to have favoured the more critical elements of the political spectrum (who came into political maturity in the aftermath of the Tiananmen crisis). If current trends are allowed to continue, LEGCO is likely to be a more boisterous public forum by 1997 - very different from the consensual nature of China's own legislature. Democratic change thus worsens the prospects for a more controlled - and controllable - post-1997 political system. For this reason, even moderate attempts at greater political openness and accountability are being resisted as potentially subversive and destabilising.
Reality of Basic Law
LEGCO's
future role...
concerned for other reasons
8
00
TOTAL P.09
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.