'Ambiguous and unscientific': critics pour scorn on electoral reform reports

The two reports on political reform released by the government yesterday are unscientific and lack credibility, a scholar, a lawmaker and a barrister maintain.

Ambiguous terms rather than an accurate number were used to generalise the public views, while there was no mention of the 800,000 votes cast in an unofficial referendum organised by Occupy Central, they said.

The South China Morning Post found many authors behind the public submissions were only referred to anonymously, with many asked not to disclose their identities. "I cannot see how the report has come up with its conclusion of 'mainstream opinion'," said Chinese University political scientist Dr Ma Ngok.

Delivered by Chief Secretary Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor to lawmakers and Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying to Beijing, both documents sum up some 124,000 submissions made during a five-month consultation on how the city should elect its leader.

The reports state that Hongkongers "generally agree" that reform should be strictly in accordance with the Basic Law, and that the next chief executive should be a person who "loves the country and loves Hong Kong". Terms such as "quite a number of views" and "considerable views" have been used to describe the support for maintaining the 1,200-strong Election Committee as the nominating body for chief executive, and for expanding its membership.

There is no mention of the Occupy poll, or the July 1 pro-democracy rally, but the report does state that "a number of groups and members of the public" expressed "divergent" views after the consultation period "through different ways and channels".