The curtain has finally fallen on the Legislative Council by-election, with Anson Chan Fang On-sang declared the winner. As a prelude to the upcoming election for the whole of Legco next September, the strategies of the different camps, the candidates' actions and the media coverage during the by-election offer some useful clues about political development in Hong Kong. The crucial question remains: was democracy a winner or a loser?
There were three distinct stages to the by-election. It was the talk of the town when Mrs Chan decided to enter the race and Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee was expected to run. Although called the 'fight of the century' for democracy, the heat of the contest dissipated somewhat after the first few weeks: Mrs Ip also positioned herself as a supporter of universal suffrage, although with a conciliatory gesture to Beijing, and both candidates quarrelled about their encounters while they were in government. The idea of the contest as a fight for democracy thus lost much of its persuasive power.
But the district council election results renewed the impetus; the pro-democracy camp's humiliating losses gave new meaning to the by-election. Suddenly it had huge significance - it would shed light on the pan-democrats' electoral future.
Accordingly, there was a shift in the strategies of both the pro-democracy and pro-establishment camps. Mrs Chan had to canvass votes not only based on her democratic appeal; she was also compelled to venture into unfamiliar territory, over issues like a minimum wage and conservation, to cultivate support from the grass roots. But a campaign based on an all-embracing platform did not seem to achieve the desired results: polls conducted just before the district council elections suggested that Mrs Chan's lead over Mrs Ip had narrowed. Ironically, the pro-democracy camp's defeat in the district council elections worked in Mrs Chan's favour. Democrats had to throw their full support behind her, and the election as a crucial battle for democracy also became much more real and urgent. Democrats were thus able to arm themselves with a powerful weapon, one that they have repeatedly deployed: the rallying cry that democracy was in imminent danger.
Conversely, the pro-establishment camp had good reasons to try to keep a lid on the campaign heat. But there were moments when members appeared to lose confidence in their strategy. The changing momentum after the district council elections was followed by a shift to negative campaigning. Some claimed that the alleged mortgage scandal surrounding Mrs Chan had been masterminded by Mrs Ip's allies. But, overall, the camp tried its best to avoid agitating middle-class voters who would be likely to flood the polling stations if they felt the pro-establishment camp would become a dominating force in Hong Kong.
Notwithstanding its supposed impartiality, the media concentrated on the two former officials while marginalising the six other candidates. And, although polls suggested that Mrs Chan retained a comfortable lead over Mrs Ip, some newspapers often interpreted these results as alarming signs for Mrs Chan. On polling day, a few even published columns and editorials associating the July 1 mass rally of 2003 with the by-election, while urging people to cast their votes. Since this clearly favoured Mrs Chan, the impartiality of some media establishments must be questioned.
