Radicals have put Hong Kong’s democratic system on the path to destruction. Can it be saved?

Is more democracy the answer to Hong Kong’s problems? Democracy does not work when the executive and legislative branches are in deadlock: worryingly, some pan-democrats are threatening to block all bills if they win a majority in September

Regina Ip

Published: 7:00am, 5 Apr 2020

Why you can trust SCMP

Hong Kong got its first taste of democracy in the 1980s when, riding on a wave of optimism about “Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong”, as promised by China’s leaders, Basic Law advisers and drafters went about devising a democratic system for Hong Kong that could survive under Chinese sovereignty.

Meetings and discussions on Hong Kong’s political system were held feverishly, as though at a constitutional convention. Eventually, Beijing agreed to give Hong Kong people a chance to elect their chief executive and legislature by the “ultimate aim” of universal suffrage, with caveats to ensure orderly progress and Chinese control.

The conflict between the core values embraced by a democratic system – the central importance of individual rights, freedoms and happiness – and those embodied by China’s age-old authoritarian system – collectivism, discipline and control – was never resolved.

But with time running out, fundamental issues requiring continuous, cool-headed discussion were swept under the carpet. In July 1997, Hong Kong stood ready to welcome the birth of a new era.

Some Hong Kong elites can be forgiven for their obstinate insistence on democracy. Democratic powers saved the world from near-annihilation by the Axis Powers in the second world war. Democracy is seen as the political system that can deliver prosperity and stability, and generally regarded as a cleaner, more transparent, accountable and self-restraining form of government.

In Hong Kong, in the run-up to its return to China, democracy also cloaked the hidden agenda in some quarters of using “People Power” as a check on the perceived unfettered power of China.

Thirty years after the enactment of the Basic Law, questions should rightly be asked about the costs and benefits of Hong Kong’s democratic development: whether more democracy is the answer to Hong Kong’s problems and, if not, whither is Hong Kong’s nascent democracy heading?

In terms of boxes checked, Hong Kong’s rule of law, which guarantees the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms, continues to be highly ranked by prestigious international bodies. Its ranking as a free economy by the Heritage Foundation has dropped somewhat recently.

But, overall, few would disagree that people in Hong Kong continue to enjoy a large measure of personal, civic and economic freedoms unmatched in many electoral democracies.

On the downside, the way democratic development has ravaged our city’s social harmony, economic development and the capacity of our government to govern is impossible to ignore.

It is as if, with every step forward in giving people the vote, our social fabric is torn further asunder; mutual respect and forbearance decline; and people’s rights and freedoms are not enhanced when a minority who use violence to advance their cause trample on the rights and freedoms of others.

Democracy should be self-reflective and thoughtful. It requires education and an effort to seek the truth before casting a vote. Democracy does not work when catchy but over-simplistic slogans like “Five key demands, not one less” obfuscate the real issues and inhibit the ability to deal with nuance and complexity.

If democracy degenerates into a process where voters are lulled into voting without thinking and they follow whoever spins the biggest lies, the democratic process risks becoming a sure-fire path to self-destruction.

Democracy should be able to help people improve their lives and offer opportunities for self-fulfillment. Democracy does not work when the executive and legislative branches are in near-permanent deadlock, as is the case in Hong Kong at the moment.

Legislators representing the pan-democracy camp have taken filibustering to a new level by preventing the House Committee of the Legislative Council from electing a chairman after 14 meetings.

That means few bills will get enacted, whatever the social or economic importance. Even though pro-government legislators still hold a majority, they are unable to break the logjam without causing a big row which would further poison the atmosphere. The dysfunctional nature of the legislature reveals serious flaws in our system that need to be fixed.

Political parties play a central role in modern democracy by giving people a stake in governance and helping to clarify issues and structure debates. As the economist Joseph Schumpeter points out, political parties are bound to stake out rival positions in a “competitive struggle for the people’s vote”.

But partisan competition descends into a dangerous game when political parties become bent on delegitimising and destroying one another.

Even more alarming is the recent statement by the Civic Party that, if the pan-democracy camp succeeds in securing a “35 plus” majority in Legco in the election this September, it will block all government bills, expenditure proposals (including the budget), and even judicial appointments unless the government accepts the “five key demands”.

The Civic Party’s manifesto is the latest evidence that Hong Kong’s democratic movement has been hijacked by the radical wing, which has taken extremist positions and played the most violent role in the anti-government protests in the past year. If that is indeed the shape of things to come, Hong Kong’s democracy has embarked on a dangerous course of self-destruction.

For fear of being disqualified, all parties or groupings in the pan-democracy camp shy away from the I-word. But if their sole goal is to seize power in blunt disregard of the people’s welfare and China’s sovereign concerns, there can only be one outcome: things will not end well.

Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee is a lawmaker and chairwoman of the New People’s Party

Post