On March 11, China’s rubber stamp parliament, the National People’s Congress (NPC), voted to overhaul Hong Kong’s electoral system, making it worse than before the change of sovereignty in 1997. It is not only a retrograde step, but signals the end of “one country, two systems.”

According to Beijing’s decision, a system will be set up to exert comprehensive jurisdiction over Hong Kong to ensure the city is run by patriots. Mainland officials said flaws and loopholes in the Basic Law allowed anti-China activists to enter government bodies through elections and conduct acts that endanger national sovereignty and security.

Under the new system, candidates who want to become Chief Executive or members of the Legislative Council will have to be vetted before if they are permitted to run. The mechanism will continue to monitor and scrutinize elected legislators and will investigate and disqualify them if they are deemed unpatriotic and unfit for office. Some commentators said the system is similar to what exists in Iran.

In displacing the current system, deputy director of the State Council’s Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office, Zhang Xiaoming, described the sweeping reform as “minimally invasive surgery” which would not shut out all opposition activists because there are patriots among pan democrats and they can still run for election.

A key aspect of the new system is to increase the number of members in the Chief Executive Election Committee, and these people will also occupy many seats in the Legislative Council. This makes the electoral system worse than what it was before the change of sovereignty.

To achieve this end, Beijing may have to rely heavily on NPC delegates and

members of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), but many of these people may not be regarded as patriots because they have dual nationality, although it is a phenomenon tolerated by Beijing.

Critics wonder how these people, who may not be regarded as patriots and may also have a lot of vested interests like the current establishment elites, can assist the central government to come up with solutions to solve Hong Kong’s deep- seated problems of housing, wealth gap and social inequality. That being the case, Beijing’s surgery may not be able to produce the desired results.

The central government has indicated it would clip the wings of property tycoons and get rid of “loyal trash and rubber stamps” within the pro-establishment camp. This underlines Beijing’s dissatisfaction with the Hong Kong establishment’s poor performance and inability to tackle the city’s long standing social and economic problems. However, some people predict the “patriots” that will be selected to replace the “loyal trash” could be just as useless, so long as the system ignores the Hong Kong public and pay no attention to their wishes and aspirations.

Beijing crafted the sweeping reform without consulting the Hong Kong people and did away with the five-step approach for constitutional reform that it had devised. Such heavy-handed way of making decision with no regard for due process is lamentable and exasperating and bodes ill for future development, with no improvement to the quality and efficiency of governance.

Because the system crafted by Beijing consists of continuous vetting and monitoring by a mechanism, details of which are still unknown, it could involve police and national security officers. Under such a system, it is almost impossible for self-respecting candidates to contest elections freely, independently, with dignity and honor.

The mechanism also subjects candidates to continuous scrutiny even after they are elected, and they could be investigated and removed from office if deemed to be “unpatriotic” or having breached the oath. Such a degrading system is unacceptable, not only to the candidates, but to many voters.

The mood in the city is particularly ugly and dark because many activists have been arrested, some accused of breaching the draconian National Security Law (NSL) although the authorities said they need many more weeks to conduct investigation. Nevertheless, most of the accused were locked up and denied bail by the courts.

To many people in Hong Kong and in the international community, an independent judiciary is the ultimate guarantee of the people’s basic rights, the rule of law and due process. Having seen the nasty developments in the past months in which some activists were given heavy sentences and many accused were denied bail, many people have lost confidence in the judiciary, thinking many judges have crumbled under political pressure from Beijing and are no longer able to try cases freely, objectively and independently.

More alarmingly, news reports said UK judges who serve on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (CFA) may decide to withdraw from the CFA in protest against Beijing’s overhaul of the city’s political system. A similar decision could also be taken by other overseas non-permanent CFA judges from Australia and Canada. If this happens, it could deal a devastating blow to Hong Kong, as that would be seen as a signal of the city having lost the independence of the judiciary, and with it, the safeguard for the people, organizations and companies’ basic rights and freedoms.

As Beijing tries to entrench the new political order, there is no consultation with the public. This leads to resentment and anxiety. Some people are also concerned that more people may be arrested and locked up, as the authorities try to intimidate and silence activists.

It is depressing to see Hong Kong deteriorating into such an awful state just within a period of less than two years. Some people may decide to leave, but others will continue the struggle, and I hope in a peaceful and non-violent way. Having a safe, peaceful and free Hong Kong underpinned by the rule of law and an independent judiciary is the desire of most Hong Kong people and something widely admired by the international community. We must do our best to keep that flame alive.

(Emily Lau, Chairperson, International Affairs Committee of the Democratic Party)

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

Click here for Chinese version

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play