The pace of political change in Hong Kong, according to the Basic Law, must be gradual and orderly. Laying down the rules of the game, however, has not been subject to such constraints. It has been achieved with breathtaking speed. In the space of 10 days, a new framework for the reform process has been put in place. The Basic Law has been interpreted and a report recommending change submitted to Beijing by the chief executive. Now we await the central government's approval. There is every reason to believe it will be forthcoming.
If so, the long-awaited consultation on political reform will finally begin. We can expect the process to be governed by the nine principles set out in Tung Chee-hwa's report. These have the potential to limit its scope considerably. The introduction of universal suffrage by 2007 and 2008 would seem to be a most unlikely prospect. Change of some kind is, however, still possible by that time. And this is something upon which Hong Kong can build.
The process by which Mr Tung's report was prepared and sent to Beijing allowed no time for the public to comment on its contents. This would not have been a problem if it was limited to a simple recommendation that change is needed. After all, the sooner the report is approved, the earlier the reform process can start. But it goes much further than that. The principles it lays down involve interpreting key parts of the Basic Law. They are of great importance. Hong Kong should have been given an opportunity to discuss the findings.
Chief among these is the conclusion that there is, indeed, a need to change the political system. This has been obvious since the mass demonstration on July 1 last year, when 500,000 people took to the streets to express their discontent. But this is the first time it has been formally recognised by the government.
PUBLIC OPINION
In making the finding, the constitutional taskforce - whose views were endorsed by Mr Tung in his report - relied heavily on public opinion. The taskforce stated, rightly, that there is a consensus in favour of change. This, the taskforce conceded, must be seen against the background of doubts and concerns within the community about the governance of Hong Kong. It noted the inadequacies of the government and the need for it to better respond to the will of the people. This is another way of saying the current system does not work.
The significance of this conclusion lies in the Basic Law requirement that changes to the system can only be made 'if there is a need'. It is the first hurdle to be overcome. But then we get to the principles that will govern the reforms. Here, the opinions of the central government held sway, rather than those of the Hong Kong people. Each of them places a potential obstacle in the way of any rapid progress towards universal suffrage.
