Set qualifying standards for our legislature
Albert Cheng seems to have a simplistic view of democracy, that its essence 'is about citizens' participation in managing public affairs' ('Everyone is equal', November 3).
How do citizens participate in public affairs? Except in ancient Greece's city states, democracy is about representative government.
Mr Cheng seems unable to differentiate democracy from demagogy, and is unaware of the fact democracy, as a political ideal, must compete with other ideals such as justice, the rights of minorities, and developmental goals. The disquieting fact about the coming Hong Kong Island by-election is that some candidates who can hardly be considered role models for school children want to represent us in public affairs. Some, who have no decent work record to speak of, are riding on publicity derived from unbecoming behaviour which every civic society would find disagreeable.
His argument with the cliche 'everyone is equal before the law' is misleading. Mr Cheng may be more intelligent and more persuasive than a lot of barristers, but he is not qualified to represent litigants and has no right of audience in the law court.
If equality before the law means one must be qualified in order to argue law, why can't the legislature have qualification requirements for those who wish to make law?
As a popularly elected legislator, Mr Cheng's idea of participatory democracy is best illustrated by his 68 absences from voting. To him, being in the game is more important than being able to contribute to the game. Absence from voting may be an honorable act, signifying the honest declaration of one's lack of opinion in a given issue.
