• Fri
  • Dec 26, 2014
  • Updated: 11:40pm

Chinese Parliamentary Sessions 2013

March 2013 sees the annual meeting of the two legislative and consultative bodies of China, where major policies are decided and key government officials appointed. The National People's Congress (NPC) is held in the Great Hall of the People in China's capital, Beijing, and with 2,987 members, is the largest parliament in the world. It gathers alongside the People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) whose members represent various groups of society.


Chilling history lesson for 'no' voter in Xi election

PUBLISHED : Friday, 15 March, 2013, 11:00am
UPDATED : Saturday, 16 March, 2013, 5:01am

While an overwhelming 2,952 delegates voted yes for China’s newly elected President Xi Jinping on Thursday, the only  “no” vote has attracted considerable attention and debate on China's social media.

Discussions around the “mysterious” voter resumed on Sina Weibo on Friday after the word “no vote” was censored on social media by authorities.

For some commenters, it brought to mind the fate of a past delegate widely believed to have voted "no" in Mao Zedong’s election as head of the new communist government in 1949.

According to some historical accounts, Zhang Dongsun, a philosopher and former CPPCC delegate, was later destroyed by Chairman Mao for his alleged actions. He was accused of selling national secrets a few years after Mao’s election, and expelled from the CPPCC.  

Zhang was arrested at the age of 82 in 1968, two years into the Cultural Revolution. His family didn’t know where he was locked up until 1973, when they were notified by authorities that Zhang had died in Beijing's Qincheng prison.

Of Zhang's three sons, two committed suicide during the Cultural Revolution, while his eldest son was arrested and tortured, according to some accounts.

“Zhang paid a high price for a no vote,” commented a blogger. “Let’s hope this time the person will not be prosecuted.”

Other netizens shared differing theories. “Did Xi vote 'no' himself?”, wrote a blogger, “Or was it just a show?”

“This is some progress for China’s democracy,” wrote journalist Zhang Lifen on Weibo. Zhang is a senior editor at the Financial Times, and editor in chief of its Chinese language Web site. 

Zhang said he didn’t’ understand why state media intentionally left out the tally in their coverage,

“Were they embarrassed because the percentage was too high?,” he wrote, “Or was it stlll not high enough for them?”



More on this story

Mystery over lone vote against Xi
16 Mar 2013 - 12:00am

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

“no vote” was censored!! This stupid, ignorant confucius minded censor cops!!! The world should vote "NO" for their existence.
(I am British living and working in China because I couldn't get a job in the UK) Love them or hate them, you have to accept that the central Government of the PRC has beat the living daylights out of the proud British, American and other western Governments when it comes to getting the economic job done. Clearly western democratic systems have completely FAILED to deliver what the 'people' want and need: Economic Stability which allows everyone a reasonable chance of earning money to support their families. And as I said, love them or hate them, I would rather live in China any day than back in broken, grey, disappointing, incompetently run Britain. One must always appreciate someone else's success and figure out what they are doing that is right, no matter how repugnant one finds the entity concerned. If you do not recognise and analyse their success and learn from it, you might be missing the answers to ones own problems. China can teach the World a lot about how to manage the economy by managing the Money Supply. But the western Governments are so arrogant and full of their own importance, that they just cannot accept that China might be doing something so right, that it is putting them decades ahead of their competition. It is all about rigid control over, and allocation of, the Money Supply. That is the lesson to learn.
Most likely that the "no" was from Xi himself because Xi is so humble.


SCMP.com Account