Compromise needed in chief executive nomination process

Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung, the secretary for justice, drew a very firm line in the article ("Plain language", January 29) - only the nominating committee, in whatever form it takes, should be involved in the nomination of candidates for the next chief executive election.

Given current tensions, it is a mistake to seek to exclude, rather than include, more opinions in crafting a working mechanism to run our political system. This is especially so when we all understand the government's preferred system will not gain popular consent, and will drive opposition rather than consensus.

On the one hand, Mr Yuen is right that the Basic Law does not contemplate actual nomination by any other than the committee. On the other hand, the Basic Law also says the method for nomination should reflect the "actual situation".

To bridge an otherwise irreconcilable gap, the government should propose a convention - that is, a non-legally binding but generally accepted process - that the committee will confirm as a candidate any person who is either:

• Nominated by petition of not fewer than 100,000 electors; or
   
• Nominated by any political party that has a minimum of five members elected to the Legislative Council under its banner, unless there are positive factual reasons to deny confirmation to such a candidate.

Reasons for denial must be made public, and be verifiable. I would suggest review by and recommendation from the Electoral Affairs Commission. Such reasons could include:

• Serious criminal conviction;
   
• Bankruptcy;
   
• Refusal to take an oath of loyalty to Hong Kong; and,
   
• Verifiable public declaration of an intent to spin off Hong Kong from China.