My Take | District councils must not become government echo chambers

A controversial bill passed by Hong Kong’s legislature almost 30 years ago provided a foundation for democratic development in the city as it prepared to return to China in 1997. Beijing strongly opposed the reforms, introduced by the last colonial governor Chris Patten, following a breakdown in negotiations with Britain over the arrangements.

One of the landmark changes, introduced for elections in 1994, concerned the district boards. All appointed seats were swept away to be replaced by directly elected members.

This was the beginning of an increasingly significant role to be played by the local assemblies, which became district councils in 1999. Over the years, they received higher levels of funding and more responsibility for affairs in their district. They also played a key role in broader electoral reforms in the city.

All this is about to change, with amendments in the pipeline. Most councillors are set to be appointed, with only about a third expected to be directly elected. As with all positions of influence in today’s Hong Kong, candidates can only stand if deemed “patriots”.

For those of us who have followed the democratic aspirations of the city’s people over the last three decades, the latest moves are disappointing. The district council elections are the most democratic, with candidates directly elected in small constituencies.

But the reforms are no surprise as Hong Kong continues to undergo a political transformation. Similar changes have already been made for the election of the Legislative Council.

Beijing was spooked by the unprecedented district council polls held during months of often violent anti-government protests in 2019. The local bodies had traditionally been pro-establishment strongholds. But the opposition camp won a landslide that year.