• Sat
  • Dec 27, 2014
  • Updated: 1:24pm
Universal Suffrage
NewsHong Kong

Basic Law expert accused of twisting facts on voting rights

Comments on universal suffrage put Basic Law veteran Maria Tam's credibility on the line

PUBLISHED : Monday, 01 April, 2013, 12:00am
UPDATED : Monday, 01 April, 2013, 5:06am

Pan-democrats and legal experts have called into question the credibility of a Basic Law heavyweight after she allegedly "twisted facts" regarding people's political rights guaranteed in an international covenant.

Maria Tam Wai-chu, local head of delegation to the National People's Congress and a Basic Law Committee member, said on two occasions yesterday that the rights to stand for election and to nominate were not covered in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provision on universal suffrage.

The lawyer also claimed that the chief executive's oath included a vow of allegiance to the central government.

But the South China Morning Post found there was an inconsistency between Tam's assertions and what was stated in the two documents concerned.

Article 25(b) of the covenant stated: "Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity ... to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage."

The chief executive's oath, in the Oaths and Declarations Ordinance, read: "I will ... bear allegiance to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and ... be held accountable to the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region."University of Hong Kong associate law professor Benny Tai Yiu-ting, citing previous judicial rulings on the article, said: "There has been no distinction between the rights to vote, to nominate and to stand for election."

Tai said the spirit of universal suffrage - "using common sense" - did not mean merely that one had the right to vote, but whether one had a real choice in the vote. "If you gave me a rotten orange and a rotten apple and asked me to choose one, does it amount to a choice?" he asked.

HKU assistant law professor Eric Cheung Tat-ming said while Tam was correct in noting that the Hong Kong government had reserved ratification of Article 25(b), it would make no sense if a universal suffrage arrangement paid no regard to the provision. "There's no reason for China to ignore international standards while pledging Hongkongers universal suffrage."

Cheung stressed that although Beijing had yet to ratify the covenant by incorporating it into local laws, being a signatory to it already demonstrated the central government's agreement with the spirit of the covenant.

There was also no need for the chief executive to bear allegiance to the central government, he said, as the mainland's constitution was in many ways contradictory with the Basic Law.

Civic Party lawmaker Dr Kenneth Chan Ka-lok said Tam "deliberately twisted the covenant to mislead the public".

Democratic Party chairwoman Emily Lau Wai-hing said Britain had reserved ratification of Article 25(b) when the covenant was extended to Hong Kong in 1976 as there had been no elections in the city then.

"But since 1991, there have been direct elections in the Legislative Council. The authoritative view of the [UN Human Rights] Committee has long been that the reservation clause should become invalid when direct elections take place," she said.

Political commentator Ching Cheong said Tam's comments made Beijing seem like a "sore loser". While Beijing had in the early years after the handover assured people that the covenant would still apply to the city, Tam was now arguing that an article would not be in force, he said.


For unlimited access to:

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



This article is now closed to comments

hard times !
agree with ianson that this Maria Tam who is found to have never entered the court for decades ever since her appointemnt to be a member of the Basic Law Drafting Committee in early eighties of last century.Maybe someone thought that being a politician so as to be closer to the future authorities was much beneficial than just being a local barrister ! She had placed her bet rightly thirty years ago ! But to most Hongkongers, her huge personal success and glory(on Mainland only of course) had caused us dearly---becoming a mouthpiece of the authorities by betraying most Hongkongers' interests from time to time in the past decades and her public image is worst as worst can be---no public trust at all !
While Ms Tam remains on the barristers' roll, she hasn't stepped into a court with a wig on for decades, probably last in the mid-80s, so using the term in proximity with her name is likely to overstate her legal prowess or authority.
hard times !
Basic Law expert, Ms Tam Wai-chu is accused of twisting provisions of the universal suffrage defined by the UN's International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights----Article 25(b). Do you think she(an experienced local barrister) deliberately did so to please her Beijing master ? Probably ! In fact, she has never defended Hongkongers' interests in the past decades ! Dont take her words seriously ! Don't !
hard times !
Thank Mr.Ching Cheong who reminded us that in the early years after the Handover (in 1997), Beijing had assured we Hongkongers that the Covenant would still be apply to the city (Hong Kong).Yet now Maria Tam ( a Beijing loyalist but a Hong Kong traitor) is now arguing that the article (25 b) in the Covenant ----the right for people to vote , to nominate and be elected in a geniune universal suffrage ----would not be in force. Beijing now seems a 'sore loser'---- a term that a Leung who kept on blasting my close friend pflim040 never understands.
hard times !
This old maid named Maria Tam is definitely twisting facts regarding people's political rights in the International Covenant of Civil & Political Rights of the United Nations (Article 25 b).Being a heavyweight in the pro-establishment and pro-Beijing camp, this Basic Law expert is making every effort to mislead innocent and sensible but pragmatic Hong Kong people (especially the qualified voters) that we have only got the right to vote between/among 2--3 candidates( pre-arranged and approved by Beijing), but don't have the right to nominate or be elected ! How vicious and irreponsible this so-called experienced barrister in town is ! Shame on her and her words (without conscience at all ) ! She is a Hongkong traitor for sure !!


SCMP.com Account