Will Hong Kong Chief Executive Election Be Stillborn?

Will Hong Kong Chief Executive Election Be Stillborn?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 1, 2012

Summary: The Chief Executive Election has led to chaos in Hong Kong. But the Hong Kong public has been given the opportunity to experience democracy. Will this produce a more suitable candidate? That depends on whether Beijing and the Election Committee are willing to listen to the public.

Full Text below:

The deadline for the Hong Kong Chief Executive nominations was yesterday. Three candidates are running. The main event is a duel between between Henry Tang Ying Yen and Leung Chun-ying. The Beijing authorities and wealthy Hong Kong businessmen prefer Henry Tang. But a stream of scandals and verbal gaffes have seriously undermined his campaign. They have also made the election results difficult to predict.

The CCP initially adopted a hands-off attitude toward the election. It was willing to accept either Henry Tang, who represented the wealthy, or Leung Chun-ying, who represented the middle class and professionals. Who knew that endless partisan bickering would reveal dirt on both candidates? Henry Tang had several extramarital affairs. His luxury mansion included an illegal and palatial subterranean addition. Leung Chun-ying meanwhile, failed to come clean on conflicts of interest in the West Kowloon District Planning Project. Both candidates' morality and ethics provoked controversy in Hong Kong, and cast doubt on the outcome of the election.

In terms of political strength, the candidate who commands the most Election Committee votes is Henry Tang. He received 80 more votes than Leung Chun-ying. He received 200 more votes than Hong Kong Pan-democracy Camp candidate Albert Ho Chun-yan. But Henry Tang's scandals, in particular the illegal subterranean addition to his home, have inspired public revulsion. As a result, his public support now hovers at 18%. He lags far behind Leung Chun-ying, at 50%. Both candidates are controversial. But the eyes of the Hong Kong public, Henry Tang is the one who does not deserve to lead Hong Kong. The voices demanding that he withdraw from the race are loud and clear. By contrast, Leung Chun-ying, who has many years of administrative experience, is considered more trustworthy by the Hong Kong public.

But public opinion does not determine who will win. The Chief Executive of Hong Kong is indirectly elected. Although there are seven million people in Hong Kong, only the 1200 members of the Election Committee get to elect the Chief Executive. Leung Chun-ying may have the support of the general public. But wealthy businessmen in Hong Kong do not trust him. They think he has anti-business leanings. The wealthy remain the most influential group within the Election Committee. If entrepreneurs do not change their attitude, or the CCP fails to intervene, Leung Chun-ying will find it difficult to win more than half the votes and get elected Chief Executive.

This reveals serious problems with Hong Kong's Chief Executive election system. It departs from reality and public opinion. The Election Committee has increased the number of committee members and the number of groups it represents. But basically it still reflects the interests of a tiny elite. It remains far removed from social reality and public opinion. As a result, a few days ago, public demands that Henry Tang withdraw from the race grew louder. News emerged that Henry Tang supporters would cast blank ballots. They would rather the March election be declared invalid, than allow Leung Chun-ying to be elected. They would then back a new candidate in May. As we can see, the indirect Chief Executive Election system itself is a major source of social and political conflict. It must be changed.

Will the end of the month Chief Executive Election really be stillborn? We will have to wait and see. Given Henry Tang's current standing, if he is re-elected by a landslide, the Hong Kong public will be outraged. Furthermore, given his words, deeds, and public manner, he would probably find it difficult to lead. He would be dogged by scandal. He would sow discord among the Hong Kong public. He would even increase public dissatisfaction with Beijing in Hong Kong. As a result, Hong Kongers have concluded that if the election is stillborn and a second election held, it would afford Hong Kongers an opportunity to rethink their choice of candidates. This might not be a bad thing.

From another perspective, if Election Committee members representing the wealthy shut out Leung Chun-ying by deliberately casting blank ballots, they might pay an unexpectedly high price. First of all, the elections could get ugly. The Hong Kong public would conclude that Election Committee members care only about their own interests, and care nothing about the larger interests of society. Secondly, if the election is not handled well, the Hong Kong Pan-democracy camp could achieve "critical minority" status, even before the second round of voting. This is not something the CCP wants to see. Thirdly, if the election is stillborn, outsiders may conclude that Hong Kong is out of control. They may conclude that the CCP is incapable of even overseeing the election of a special administrator. The renomination process could be chaotic.

The Hong Kong Chief Executive Election has evolved into what it is today, both by accident and by necessity. The by accident part is how the candidate preferred by Beijing was unable to withstand scrutiny. He had feet of clay. Clearly the CCP failed to vet its candidates carefully, At the very least it was a poor judge of character. The by necessity part is that in moving toward democracy, opening old wounds and exposing new scandals is the norm. All segments of society will be more critical regarding their political choices. Unqualified candidates will no longer be able to keep their dirty secrets.

The Chief Executive Election has led to chaos in Hong Kong. But the Hong Kong public has been given the opportunity to experience democracy. Will this produce a more suitable candidate? That depends on whether Beijing and the Election Committee are willing to listen to the public.

香港特首選舉會流產嗎？
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.03.01 01:37 am

香港特首提名昨天截止，共有三人角逐；主戲是唐英年和梁振英主演的「雙英對決」。問題在，最獲北京及香港富商屬意的唐英年，因陸續傳出醜聞及發言失當，已嚴重影響其聲望，也使選舉結果變得難以預測。

中共原本對這次選舉抱著開放態度，無論是代表富商階級的唐英年，或者是代表專業中產階級的梁振英，任何一人出線，北京都可接受。不料，各陣營在纏鬥過程中不斷互挖瘡疤，唐英年被爆出婚外情及其豪宅「皇宮地庫」的大違建，梁振英則涉及在西九龍規劃中未誠實利益迴避。兩人的私德及操守，都引發香港社會的議論，為選舉投下變數。

若論政治實力，掌握最多選票的是唐英年，連署提名他的選舉委員較梁振英多了八十幾票，更較民主派的何俊仁多了近兩百票。但若論民意的綜合評價，唐英年的醜聞──尤其是地下大違建，已引起廣大民眾的強烈反感，導致他的民意支持度低至一成八上下徘徊，遠遠落後獲有五成多支持的梁振英。亦即，「雙英」雖各有爭議，但在港人眼中，唐英年的形象明顯不配領導香港，要求他退選的聲浪甚囂塵上；相形之下，具有多年行政經驗的梁振英，則較受港人信賴。

然而，民意卻不是決定誰能出線的主要關鍵。問題在，香港特首是採間接選舉制，香港雖有七百萬人口，卻僅有一千兩百名選舉委員有資格選舉特首。梁振英雖擁有一般普遍民意的支持，他卻不受香港富商階級的信賴，認為他有「反商」的傾向；而富商則是選舉委員會中最具影響力的一群。如果企業家不改變態度，或中共不插手干預或授意，梁振英想要拿到過半的選票當選特首，仍然有相當大的困難。

此一現象，反映了香港特首選舉制度的嚴重內在問題：悖離現實和民意。這屆選舉委員會雖增加了人數和組別，但基本上反映的只是香港少數菁英階層的利益，和普遍的社會現實及民意仍有極大的距離。也因此，就在日前外界要求唐英年「退選」的呼聲高漲之際，即傳出「擁唐英年」的一派將不惜投下「空白票」，不惜讓三月底的選舉「流選」，也絕不讓梁振英當選；俟五月，再另擁新人參選。由此可見，特首間接選舉的制度本身，已成為香港社會及政治的主要矛盾來源之一，不改不行。

月底的特首選舉，是否真會出現「流產」的局面，值得密切觀察。以唐英年目前的人望，他若高票當選，恐將引起港人極大的反感。再者，以其言行及素養，他當選後也極可能無法扮演一位稱職的領導人，包括後續的醜聞，都將導致香港人離心離德，甚至升高港人對北京的埋怨。也因此，香港政壇認為，若流產而舉辦第二度選舉，以時間換取空間，重新思考提名，未嘗不是壞事。

但換一個角度看，代表富商階層的委員若為了杯葛梁振英而刻意投下「白票」，也可能要付出難以預料的代價。其一，是把選舉變得更為醜陋，讓港人覺得選委只重私利，而不顧社會整體利益。其二，倘若操作不當，在需進入二輪投票時，不啻把泛民主派置於左右選舉的「關鍵少數」地位，這將不是中共所樂見。其三，流產將讓外界留下「香港失控」的印象，認為中共連一個特首都無法搞定，重新提名可能亂上加亂。

香港特首選舉演成今天的局面，是意外，也是必然。意外的是，北京心中屬意的頭號人選，竟然如此禁不起檢驗，輕易就露了餡；這顯示，中共若非在布局上太不謹慎，至少是缺乏識人之明。必然的是，在邁向民主的過程中，揭瘡疤、爆醜事都將成為常態，社會各方的檢驗也將更嚴厲，不對的人選是怎麼樣也隱藏不住的。

從這次特首選舉過程的爭議看，香港雖是「亂象」連連，港人卻展現並體驗了更真實的民主力量。至於最後能否產生較適合的人選，就要看北京及選委們能否聽取民意了！