Advertisement
Hong Kong extradition bill
Opinion
SCMP Editorial
Opinion
SCMP Editorial

Greater understanding of ‘one country, two systems’ benefits all

  • Role of central government bodies in city affairs has now been clarified by Chief Executive Carrie Lam following conflicting statements by constitutional bureau

2-MIN READ2-MIN
Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor meets the press at the Central Government Offices, Tamar. Photo: K. Y. Cheng
SCMP Editorial
Editorials represent the views of the South China Morning Post on the issues of the day.

A constitutional crisis is the last thing Hong Kong needs as it grapples with the Covid-19 pandemic after months of social unrest. But the debate arising from a long-running deadlock in Legislative Council affairs has inevitably turned the spotlight on the central government’s jurisdiction over the city, an issue that has not been given the attention it deserves.

In a belated move, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor yesterday sought to clear the air over the roles of Beijing’s liaison office and the State Council’s Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office (HKMAO). Lam said the two bodies were not bound by “non-interference” provisions under Article 22 of the Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution, and have the authority to oversee the implementation of the “one country, two systems” governing formula. That position was further reinforced by the HKMAO.
This is not the first time the role of the liaison office has been called into question. The latest row came after it slammed ongoing attempts by opposition lawmakers to stall a national anthem law by blocking the election of Legco’s House Committee chairman, raising questions as to whether the city’s high degree of autonomy had been compromised. Lam’s clarification stands in stark contrast to the understanding of many. Despite its full jurisdiction over Hong Kong, Beijing refrained from openly commenting on local affairs in the early years after the 1997 handover. Even government officials have all along misunderstood the role of the liaison office, thereby explaining the three conflicting statements issued by the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau as it sought to dismiss allegations of interference by the body over the weekend.
Advertisement

The dispute has enhanced understanding of Beijing’s position on one country, two systems and its implementation. While the Basic Law has no provisions regarding the oversight authority of the two offices, one function of the liaison office is to “execute duties assigned by the central government”. Understandably, this has raised concerns as to whether the city’s high degree of autonomy will be undermined. However, while Beijing is expected to speak out on issues of concern more often, it should continue to respect the city’s high degree of autonomy granted under one country, two systems. That same spirit should extend to both offices.

The role of the liaison office is just the trigger point for a wider debate on how the one country, two systems formula should be, in Beijing’s wording, accurately and comprehensively implemented. A comfortable balance with full understanding and acceptance by both sides will go a long way to enhancing the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong as a special administrative region under Chinese rule.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Select Voice
Select Speed
1.00x