Hong Kong needs a democratic system that actually works

As the curtain began to fall on phase one of the government's consultation on the methods for electing the chief executive in 2017 and for forming the Legislative Council in 2016, political parties, professional bodies, scholars and other activist groups made a mad dash to submit their representations to the government before the May 3 deadline.

Of particular interest were a conference organised by the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology on April 26 and the views of the Bar Association, published on April 28.

It is interesting to note that at both the conference and at an earlier academic roundtable on the same subject held at the University of Hong Kong, Professor Larry Diamond of Stanford University, a scholar well known for his dedication to spreading democracy around the world, was invited to present his views on why a democratic election for the chief executive of Hong Kong is necessary and feasible in 2017.

Although Diamond was not physically in Hong Kong, the pan-democrats' heavy reliance on his input puts it beyond doubt that he was viewed as a key spokesman in helping them seize the moral and intellectual high ground in Hong Kong's constitutional debate.

As expected, Diamond took as axiomatic that liberal, electoral democracy which guarantees individual rights and freedoms, human dignity, restraint of abuse of power, rule of law, accountability and transparency, and popular sovereignty, is the best form of government. He argued that Hong Kong is ready for democracy whether in terms of per capita GDP, overall human development, class structure, political culture or "state" (that is, government) capacity.

As a former student of Diamond's, it is not for me to enter into an argument with a democratic scholar of his stature over the philosophical and normative justifications for liberal, electoral democracy.