mravi shanmugan
By M Ravi
Mr Shanmugam is correct to point out that Hong Kong was not a democracy in the 150 years when the British were in power.
When the British Crown colony of Hong Kong was surrendered back to Communist China in 1997, the Hong Kong people still had no universal suffrage in voting for their political chief.
Mr. Shanmugam says that Hong Kongers need to understand that China has acted in accordance with the Basic Law. The Hong Kong people need to recognise that they are part of China and there are some things that China will allow and others that China will reject.
However, the Law Minister’s observation is based on his understanding of the meaning of universal suffrage.
To this extent, attention is drawn to the alternative consultation paper jointly released by two Hong Kong pro-democracy groups, the Civic Party and Hong Kong 2020, in which the concept of universal suffrage had been addressed.
The paper pointed out that the Hong Kong government’s consultation document failed to place the issues surrounding the Chief Executive’s 2017 election method in the context of the legal principles that underpin the definition of universal suffrage, governed by Articles 25, 26 and 39 of the Basic Law, Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 21 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights (HKBOR).
The articles state that;
(i) All Hong Kong residents shall be equal before the law (Article 25 of the Basic Law);
(ii) Every permanent resident shall have the right to vote and the right to stand for election in accordance with law (Article 26 of the Basic Law);
(iii) Every permanent resident shall have the right without unreasonable restrictions to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage guaranteeing the free expression of the will of electors (Article 25(b) of the ICCPR applied to Hong Kong by Article 39 of the Basic Law and Article 21 of the HKBOR).
It is true that Hong Kong is a special administrative region of China. Under the One Country, Two Systems formula, Hong Kong is not a sovereign country.
And this is where the best laid plans of bureaucrats run afoul of the wishes of ordinary people.
At issue is whether the Chief Executive should be freely elected by Hong Kong people without prior vetting by a nominating committee or pre-selected by a nominating committee before people may cast a ballot.
It seems a significant number of voters in Hong Kong prefer the former.
At this juncture, it is crucial to remind ourselves of the meaning of universal suffrage as underpinned by the legal principles mentioned above.
It is difficult to see why Hong Kong voters should be denied the right to choose their Chief Executive, not just through a one-person-one-vote system, but also in a direct election without first going through a select group of pro-Beijing elites. After all it is their Chief Executive!
It seems the fear of China, or rather the Chinese communist regime, is that someone who is not its loyalist might get elected.
Singapore faced teething problems when it became part of Malaysia. It was set free to follow its own path. This is not likely to happen to Hong Kong.
Will China be like the willow that moves with the winds of change or will it be like the rigid tree that watches one of its branches snap off?
Meanwhile we sympathise with the desire of Hong Kongers who want to have a say in managing their own affairs.

Subscribe
Notify of
5 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Largest shipment of pangolin scales seized in a single haul globally in recent years

Close to 13 tonnes of pangolins scales along with nearly 180 kg…

地砖破裂租户申诉多次! 建屋局:已联络事主商定维修期

租赁组屋的单位内出现地砖破裂的问题,妇女向有关当局做出多次投诉,甚至曾在大选前向到访的候选人投诉,然而事过三个月却毫无进展。建屋局表示,看到妇女帖文时就已经和对方联系,对之前的维修安排做出解释之余,也商定了维修时间。 署名Roselin Woon的住户在脸书上投诉,指她所居住,位于惹兰勿刹(Jalan Besar)的组屋单位内地砖破裂、门和厕所门已损坏,她曾于今年6月向建屋局做出反映,也曾在7月份大选期间,趁着惹兰勿刹集选区议员潘丽萍,到该处拜访选民时作出投诉。 她指出,建屋局曾在7月大选前,派出一名林姓官员到住家来视察,并拍下破损的部位,还表示会在8月展开修理工作。“官员注意到我有一名三个月大的孩子,所以确认会在8月展开工作。” 而在向潘丽萍投诉时,对方则吩咐助理记下了住户的个人资料和家中破损部位,并保证会处理所有问题。 然而直到上个月,妇女的宝宝已经五个月大,开始学习翻身了,却未见有人来处理地砖破裂问题,令她感到担忧。她之后表示,曾向潘丽萍发出询问邮件,但是并没有获得任何答复。 潘丽萍在受询到相关问题时指出,她自6月开始至上个月20日,她都多次向建屋局反映Roselin的课题。 她表示,在进行家访活动时,不乏有组屋住户反映住家出现自然耗损问题,因此她将在此次国会中提问,以了解建屋局是否能够提供更多资源,为组屋单位进行积极检查和定期维修服务。她认为不应该等到问题出现了,才来维修。 建屋局坦言曾在6月份接到Roselin的投诉,而当局已经安排负责维修工作的承包商。然而有关维修工作还未进行,主要是因为在阻断措施期间就已累积大量工程待完成,且建筑业人力有限所致。 当局表示曾尝试联络妇女,但是她所提供的手机号码已不再使用,上门探访时家中也没人,所以无法向对方做出解释。他们指出,已在Roselin发出帖文时,透过脸书和她取得联系,而据Roselin的解释,她当时因一些私人原因而没有在该处居住一段时间。 当局表示,已和Roselin商议,会在未来几天展开维修工程,而破损的地砖暂时也用纸皮遮盖着。Roselin在获得相关单位协助后,已删除有关帖文了。

National Solidarity Party launches free legal clinic

The following is a press release by the National Solidarity Party on…

Mindef: More than 1,000 trained to operate howitzers and 12,500 rounds fired without problems

MINDEF issued a media release yesterday (30 Jan) defending its safety record…