Under a democratic system, the people know who can represent them in every election, from which of the place’s leader to the small elections for local representatives. If people are allowed to take part in the election and to be elected only if they love the party-state, then the political will of the party-state leader will override democracy, and people-led will be mutated to party-led or monarch-led. The amendment of Hong Kong’s electoral system indicates “one country, one system” will become reality. This has not only cut off the democratization process of Hong Kong, but it also means the democratization transformation of China is not about to begin any time soon.

The “decision on improving the electoral system of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region” has already caused much attention and criticism from the international community before being passed at the fourth session of the 13th National People’s Congress (NPC). Most western countries believe the CCP has violated “one country, two systems” by changing Hong Kong’s electoral system. They have not just denounced such perverse decision of the CCP, but will also have a joint action against it. So why is the CCP so desperate to “amend” Hong Kong’s electoral system?

At the opening speech of the NPC session, Wang Chen, Vice Chairman of the Standing Committee of the NPC, said that since the anti-ELAB movement in 2019, the anti-China forces and secessionists in Hong Kong have openly advocated “independence of Hong Kong” and tried to wrest the power of authority from the Hong Kong government via elections and endanger national security. Martin Liao, one of the Hong Kong deputies to the NPC, told Reuters Beijing’s proposal to reform Hong Kong’s electoral system is to prevent a “dictatorship of the majority.”

Wang Chen obviously does not understand democratic politics. The nature of democracy is to wrest the power peacefully to avoid a cycle of peace and chaos where violence is being used against violence. Martin Liao’s statement shows that he lacks political common sense. Hong Kong has the nature of a city-state, so its election would be equivalent to the U.S. state elections, of which one man one vote direct election is the norm. The main purpose of the U.S. Electoral College is the state balance of political power checks and balances the influence the majority votes have on the state’s balance of power. It is a system China can take reference from if it wants to apply federalism in the future. However, if the local government uses the representative system on every level, it will only increase unnecessary political costs.

The comments from the NPC spokesperson and Hong Kong deputy to the NPC have reflected their ignorance or intended distortion of political common sense and treated an ordinary parliamentary political game as a behavior of subverting the state. Therefore the top authority of CCP made such a terrible decision and tried to achieve its political aim to have absolute control of Hong Kong by limiting the rights of free elections that Hongkongers are entitled to have. It has destroyed Hong Kong’s autonomy and its process of double universal suffrage and caused “one country, two systems” to exist in the name only.

The reform plan proposed by the CCP authority includes expanding the Hong Kong Election Committee from 1,200 to 1,500 people and expanding the Legislative Council (LegCo) from 70 to 90 seats. The only goal of the reform is to increase the number of “patriots” in the government to ensure the legislation and elections of Hong Kong are in line with the will of the party-state. The so-called “dictatorship of the majority” is a completely false accusation. But the undeniable truth is, by using the party and state machine, the CCP has violently stripped the majority of Hongkongers of their political rights.

The CCP emphasized “patriots governing Hong Kong” on the Hong Kong electoral system “reform.” It also believes that is “international practice.” But no democratic countries in the world would require their parliamentary candidates to be a “patriot” because “being patriotic” is an undefinable emotional feeling and a false question. The voters only have to choose who represents them, and a democratic election process is complete. If the elected person betrays the country or breaks the law, a corresponding legal procedure will be in place to impeach and investigate. The only thing a democratic election cannot do is to make political validation and identify who patriotic is in advance.

So what is the essence of being patriotic in the context of the CCP? Xia Baolong, Director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, repeatedly stressed that Hong Kong must be “governed by patriots” at a symposium in Beijing on Feb. 22. The new definition of “patriots” is, in fact, someone who loves the party. Song Ru’an, Deputy Commissioner of China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Hong Kong, told the reporters of the AFP, “when we talk about patriotism, we are not talking about the abstraction of loving a cultural or historical China, but rather loving the currently existing People’s Republic of China under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party.” He said, “patriots should respect the Chinese Communist Party,” and “we’ll review whether candidates meet that criteria.”

As the party and state are as one, so in the context of China, a patriot is someone who loves the party. The party led the NPC to formulate the constitution, and now the will of the party will be overriding the whole population of Hong Kong and lead the amendment of Hong Kong’s electoral system. If only those who love the party-state can be in the Election Committee, who will guarantee the rights of the Hong Kong citizens when there is a conflict of interests between the party-state and Hong Kong?

The preamble of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China established the party-led-people legislation, and the party overrides the constitution. An authoritarian system of one political party and one leader inevitably leads to the personal will of the party’s core figure determining the political will of the country. It is the exact source of China’s major social disasters.

The result of the “reform” is Hong Kong, where still had a parliamentary game of politics with certain fairness, will become a top-down party-ruled society. Double universal suffrage of Hong Kong will become impossible. It will not only cause the regression of democracy but also severely damage the limited freedom and judicial independence Hong Kong has. The NPC of China has been completely “partyized” and become the rubber stamp of the CCP. Now the decision on amending Hong Kong’s electoral system has been passed, which means Hong Kong has become a city ruled by the CCP.

The relationship between Hong Kong ruled under “one country, two systems” and the central government is somewhat like federal states. The implementation of double universal suffrage would have had a significant meaning to China’s political transformation. But the CCP does not have the confidence it should have when responding to Hong Kong issues. Instead, it has displayed a strong patriarchal authority. The CCP has “three fears” toward Hong Kong: fear of Hong Kong independence, fear of Hong Kong becoming a platform used by opposition powers to affect the mainland, and fear of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy camp taking power. The CCP would have known this fear is unfounded if it cares to analyze the federalism of the U.S. Whether politically or economically, the central government can play an effective game with the local government on equal footing, just like the U.S. federal government.

The CCP is wary of Hong Kong becoming independent, but why did the U.S. authority completely ignore the California independence movement or the more traditional Texas independence? Some Texans were dissatisfied with the U.S. government system and sought independence through constitution. We did not see the federal government strictly banned their action, nor it changed the local law to make the independence movement illegal. The self-confidence of a democratic system comes from its belief in the rationality and values identified by the majority of people that a small number of people supporting independent movement cannot influence the state concept of the majority.

The current U.S. president is a Democrat, but many states are controlled by the Republicans. Biden administration has a relaxed border policy, but Texas, governed by the Republicans, has put in a lot of resources to strengthen the border security. What can the White House do? It can only do what it thinks is right. The White House can intervene under the law if Texas violates human rights or the constitution, but the administrative intervention can only be left to the state government.

The federal government cannot change the election regulations for the state governments and allow only people loyal to the federal government or patriots to be the leader or parliamentary member of the state. Trump believes building a wall is patriotic, but the Biden administration thinks tolerating illegal immigrants is in line with U.S. interests. If Trump stipulated non-patriots cannot run for president during his term, perhaps Biden would not have met Trump’s conditions of being a patriot. Trump alone cannot decide whether his opponent or competitor is patriotic or not because the U.S. has an independent judiciary and a two-party system. But the CCP is a one-party dictatorship. The party controls the legislation, executive, and administration of the whole country. Therefore it can achieve top-down political censorship and legalize an unlawful method via a “legal” way of amending the electoral system.

Hong Kong was a platform to attract business and investment during China’s reform era, as well as a window for the mainland to get in touch with the western world, both because of the political system the British left behind when governing Hong Kong. “One country, two systems” has also basically extended Hong Kong’s unique political and economic advantage.

The generation of Xi Zhongxun and Deng Xiaoping had opened an era of mainland China with a relatively free economy through the experiment of Shenzhen Special Economic Zone. Now, a historical turning point, an opportunity arises. If the CCP would follow the historical trend and gradually honor its promise of implementing double universal suffrage, the liberal democratization process of the mainland’s political sphere would have opened. The wheel of history either advances or drops back, but the CCP leader of this generation has ended the political democratization process.

The prosperity of Hong Kong was brought by freedom and the independent judiciary. When the democracy of Hong Kong cannot progress and loses its freedom and the rule of law bit by bit, Hong Kong will no longer be prosperous. Hong Kong, the mainland, and even international society will suffer losses. The national security law implementation and amendment of Hong Kong’s electoral system by the CCP is creating a not-so-happy ending with multiple casualties.

(Wu Zuolai, an independent academic.)

Click here for Chinese version

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.

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

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