134
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
a gradual process. I believe that the people of Hong Kong will have sufficient
i.e. an election in which all the people of Hong Kong will be eligible to awareness by 1997 to elect the Chief Executive on a one-person-one-vote basis,
participate. Therefore, I am of the opinion that given time, the people of Hong Kong will possess sufficient civic consciousness and after having experienced one or two elections more, they will be fully capable of electing their Chief Executive. And it should be an election in which the voters would be given a real choice and all the people could participate. In this respect, we should take into account that the people of an ever developing city would be fully qualified to elect the Chief Executive on a one-person-one-vote basis by 1997.
I also feel that in this cosmopolitan city, due consideration should be given to international standards, and when important principles are being discussed, they must be evaluated by the international standards. There are international standards regarding certain fundamental human rights. As for freedom, human rights and rule-of-law which are most cherished by the Hong Kong people and on which we have laid strong emphasis, there are also some basic international standards which we can follow. These standards have been clearly specified in the two international covenants on human rights. I hope that when the Draft Basic Law is to be amended, the authorities concerned will consider incorporating in the Basic Law all the civil and political rights that apply to Hong Kong. I also hold that Hong Kong is more internationalized than many other cities. Thus, in respect of the rights regarding economy, society and culture, I also hope that the related provisions that apply to Hong Kong will be implemented through legislation made by the future Legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. If these two principles mentioned above cannot be fulfilled, the people of Hong Kong cannot acknowledge that the human rights which they shall enjoy in the future are the human rights which genuinely satisfy the objective standards and which are what the residents of a really modernized city should enjoy. If the future courts do not have the final interpretation of these human rights and China's standards are to be used in interpreting them, I believe that the people of Hong Kong will not accept this arrangement. So I propose that the Basic Law should clearly stipulate that the courts of Hong Kong shall have the full power to interpret the human rights of the Hong Kong people and exercise the power of adjudication. This would enable the future judicial organs to nullify any laws which are in contradiction to the provisions of basic human rights.
Only with these two standards achieved can we set our minds at ease to see that the human rights of the Hong Kong people are being fully safeguarded. Only after this ever developing city has obtained some fundamental human rights and achieved progress politically would we have full confidence that the city will enjoy a high degree of autonomy after the transition.
I firmly believe that, if the idea of Hong Kong people to administer Hong Kong is to materialize, it should not wait until after 1997. Whether China respects our understanding of and views towards the Basic Law already sets the
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 71 of 182
135
course for this idea. It is like the prologue of a play, or as it were, the prelude to a musical piece. If the play begins badly, there is no point in watching it through and the audience will leave before the finale. Therefore, in the principle of a gradual change, I hope that our future legislature should have a baseline to begin with, which means we cannot accept an undemocratic beginning. In this connection, I feel that, after mutual compromise and consultation, it would be a steady beginning for our future legislature to start with 50% direct election. Although such a beginning might not be up to international standards, it is a compromise that Hong Kong people would accept willingly. In countries abroad, there is not a single case where the basis of 'one-person-one-vote' could be reduced by 50%. However, as Hong Kong people are realistic, we might be able to accept the proposal if there were chances of improvement. In my opinion, compromise could start with the legislature. Only after we have come to a consensus on the election for the legislature could we discuss how the election of the Chief Executive on the basis of 'one-person-one-vote' should be conducted, or whether we should adopt indirect elections. We could only have a consensus if there is an acceptable alternative available for the election of the legislature. A consensus is a good beginning upon which we could decide on a concerted alternative for the election of the Chief Executive. In this respect, I appreciate what two of my colleagues said earlier that we could accept a combination of 50% by direct election and 50% by election through functional constituencies at the same time. All of us do have doubts about the idea of electoral college. But why do the supporters of the electoral college not give up their proposal? If they do, I trust that the democratic group would also consider giving up the seats of district elections in the legislature. We do not wish to see the electoral college which disappears in 1991 re-emerge in 1997.
If there is evidence of abuses and loopholes in the election process of the district board electoral constituencies, we may consider giving it up. (This is however my personal opinion, it may not necessarily represent the views of the 'democratic group'.) But I hope that we could arrive at a consensus by starting with the legislature, and then proceed to seek an alternative acceptable to all parties.
Madam Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.
(Dr. Ronald D. B. LEUNG left the meeting at 5.10 p.m.)
MRS. CHOW CHEUNG WAI-PING (in Cantonese):—Madam Chairman, in rising to support your motion, I would like to make the following comments.
I think that a set of good Basic Law should include the following three points: (1) It should strictly adhere to the spirit of the Sino-British Joint Declaration and should ensure that Hong Kong will have a genuinely high degree of autonomy;
(2) It should be able to preserve what is good in the existing political structure of Hong Kong and allow further improvement; and
134
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
a gradual process. I believe that the people of Hong Kong will have sufficient
i.e. an election in which all the people of Hong Kong will be eligible to awareness by 1997 to elect the Chief Executive on a one-person-one-vote basis,
participate. Therefore, I am of the opinion that given time, the people of Hong Kong will possess sufficient civic consciousness and after having experienced one or two elections more, they will be fully capable of electing their Chief Executive. And it should be an election in which the voters would be given a real choice and all the people could participate. In this respect, we should take into account that the people of an ever developing city would be fully qualified to elect the Chief Executive on a one-person-one-vote basis by 1997.
I also feel that in this cosmopolitan city, due consideration should be given to international standards, and when important principles are being discussed, they must be evaluated by the international standards. There are international standards regarding certain fundamental human rights. As for freedom, human rights and rule-of-law which are most cherished by the Hong Kong people and on which we have laid strong emphasis, there are also some basic international standards which we can follow. These standards have been clearly specified in the two international covenants on human rights. I hope that when the Draft Basic Law is to be amended, the authorities concerned will consider incor- porating in the Basic Law all the civil and political rights that apply to Hong Kong. I also hold that Hong Kong is more internationalized than many other cities. Thus, in respect of the rights regarding economy, society and culture, I also hope that the related provisions that apply to Hong Kong will be implemented through legislation made by the future Legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. If these two principles mentioned above cannot be fulfiled, the people of Hong Kong cannot acknowledge that the human rights which they shall enjoy in the future are the human rights which genuinely satisfy the objective standards and which are what the residents of a really modernized city should enjoy. If the future courts do not have the final interpretation of these human rights and China's standards are to be used in interpreting them, I believe that the people of Hong Kong will not accept this arrangement. So I propose that the Basic Law should clearly stipulate that the courts of Hong Kong shall have the full power to interpret the human rights of the Hong Kong people and exercise the power of adjudication. This would enable the future judicial organs to nullify and laws which are in contradiction to the provisions of basic human rights.
Only with these two standards achieved can we set out mind at ease to see that the human rights of the Hong Kong people are being fully safeguarded. Only after this ever developing city has obtained some fundamental human rights and achieved progress politically would we have full confidence that the city will enjoy a high degree of autonomy after the transition.
I firmly believe that, if the idea of Hong Kong people to administer Hong Kong is to materialize, it should not wait unit after 1997. Whether China respects our understanding of and views towards the Basic Law already sets the
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Page 71 of 182
135
course for this idea. It is like the prologue of a play, or as it were, the prelude to a musical piece. If the play begins badly, there is no point in watching it through and the audience will leave before the finale. Therefore, in the principle of a gradual change, I hope that our future legislature should have a base line to begin with, which means we cannot accept an undemocratic beginning. In this connection, I feel that, after mutual compromise and consultation, it would be a steady beginning for our future legislature to start with 50% direct election. Although such a beginning might not be up to international standards, it is a compromise that Hong Kong people would accept willingly. In countries abroad, there is not a single case where the basis of 'one-person-one-vote' could be reduced by 50%. However, as Hong Kong people are realistic, we might be able to accept the proposal if there were chances of improvement. In my opinion, compromise could start with the legislature. Only after we have come to a consensus on the election for the legislature could we discuss how the election of the Chief Executive on the basis of 'one-person-one-vote' should be conducted, or whether we should adopt indirect elections. We could only have a consensus if there is an acceptable alternative available for the election of the legislature. A consensus is a good beginning upon which we could decide on a concerted alternative for the election of the Chief Executive. In this respect, I appreciate what two of my colleagues said earlier that we could accept a combination of 50% by direct election and 50% by election through functional constituencies at the same time. All of us do have doubts about the idea of electoral college. But why do the supporters of the electoral college not give up their proposal? If they do, I trust that the democratic group would also consider giving up the seats of district elections in the legislature. We do not wish to see the electoral college which disappears in 1991 re-emerge in 1997.
If there are evidence of abuses and loopholes in the election process of the district board electoral constituencies, we may consider to give it up. (This is however my personal opinion, it may not necessarily represent the views of the 'democratic group'.) But I hope that we could arrive at a consensus by starting with the legislature, and then proceed to seek for an alternative acceptable to all parties.
Madam Chairman, with these remarks, I support the motion.
(Dr. Ronald D. B. LEUNG left the meeting at 5.10 p.m.)
MRS. CHOW CHEUNG WAI-PING (in Cantonese):—Madam Chairman, in rising to support your motion, I would like to make the following comments.
I think that a set of good Basic Law should include the following three points: (1) It should strictly adhere to the spirit of the Sino-British Joint Declaration and should ensure that Hong Kong will have a genuinely high degree of autonomy;
(2) It should be able to preserve what is good in the existing political
structure of Hong Kong and allow further improvement; and
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.