By the people
The South China Morning Post's editorial calling on Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa to move himself upstairs has aroused a lot of discussion. Hong Kong residents are obviously frustrated and worried about the government's poor performance.
They did not elect the Tung administration, but its incompetence has affected everyone's livelihood. Many people are asking if the community cannot do anything other than wait until 2007, and how bad will the economy be then, and what price will we have to pay?
With the support of the Chinese leadership, Mr Tung's re-election encountered no challenge. In his campaign, he did not even bother to prepare a substantial political platform and avoided the issue of budget deficits and the associated measures to raise revenue and cut expenditure. To consolidate his control, he introduced a ministerial system at the beginning of his second term. He explained that such a system would make top officials more accountable to the people; but he apparently has not given serious consideration as to how he himself can strengthen his accountability to the community.
After his re-election, Mr Tung delayed the delivery of the first policy address of his second term. Hongkongers had to wait for three more months for a rather hollow speech.
Again, Mr Tung avoided discussing proposals to cut expenditure and raise revenue. He even refused to attend any phone-in programmes after his policy address. The community's impression has been that as his administration's performance deteriorates, Mr Tung is becoming more reluctant to face the people.
According to Article 43 of the Basic Law, the chief executive 'shall be accountable to the Central People's Government and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region'. No one doubts that the chief executive has to be accountable to the central government, although his reports to the Chinese leadership have never been revealed to the public.
His accountability to the Hong Kong special administrative region, however, has no legal or constitutional basis. It is almost like saying that a university teacher should be responsible to society.
After his election, the Election Committee has had no control over him. When Legco refuses him a vote of thanks on his policy address, that has no impact on his work, either.
In the past, the British colonial administration secured its legitimacy through its performance.
Where does the chief executive's legitimacy come from today? On what grounds can he ask Hong Kong people to share the burden together in these times of severe economic difficulties?
Presumably, Mr Tung will not resign, nor will he agree to move upstairs. But residents should not, and cannot, wait for electoral reforms any longer.
If the Tung administration respects public opinion, it should immediately begin reviewing the electoral system for the chief executive and the legislature. The review should ensure that Hongkongers can consider various reform proposals, including the election of the chief executive and all the seats in the legislature, by universal suffrage. The community should also be given a voice on all options concerning the timetable for implementation.
The objective of the review should be to ensure that the future Hong Kong government, as well as the chief executive, will be accountable to Hong Kong people. There must be guarantees that the community has adequate channels to clearly articulate its views and indicate its options and that the government will be bound by the people's choices.
If it fails to deliver on this, the Tung administration has no claim to legitimacy and no moral grounds to ask Hong Kong people to share the burden.
Joseph Cheng Yu-shek is a professor of political science at the City University of Hong Kong
