Hong Kong's legislative elections last week were an exceptional example of democratic elections under an authoritarian government. Although the democratic camp won 60 percent of the direct vote, they did not gain a majority, only 25 of the 60 seats. It has therefore been portrayed by the international media as a defeat for the democratic camp and a great victory for Beijing's rule over Hong Kong. Meanwhile, officials in China's Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office happily declared that it was the most democratic election in the history of the territory.
Pinning their hopes on the effects of their demonstrations, the democratic camp said before the elections that their goal was to gain a majority with 31 seats and use the Legislative Council as a counter-balance to Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
A close look at the proportional representation system, however, shows that if democrats wanted to gain a majority in the legislature, they would have to win 24 seats or more in the direct elections, or 80 percent of the vote. This is almost impossible in a democratic election, and probably only occurs when a communist party elects its secretary-general.
The political actions of Hong Kong democrats are thus based on unrealistic vote calculations. Although there have been calls for tactical voting, attempting to mobilize huge numbers of voters in order to bring about the democratization of Hong Kong is naive and leaves Beijing with much room to maneuver.
Clearly, Hong Kong democracy lacks a fair electoral system capable of truly reflecting public opinion. Public participation in the election, which resulted in a record voter turnout of 55 percent, nonetheless ended in heavy defeat. Even if the democratic camp had won a majority, the "Administrative Control" written into Hong Kong's Basic Law makes the Legislative Council little more than a consultative institution. Furthermore, the National People's Congress dismissed the notion of real, meaningful democracy in Hong Kong back in April.
This may explain why many mild-mannered, middle class democratic legislators failed to get re-elected, while the bold and outspoken popular former radio host Albert Cheng (鄭經翰) and "Longhair" Leung Kwok-hung (梁國雄) together received more votes than the Liberal Party -- the second largest party with 10 seats. In contrast to the tears of the top leaders of the Democratic Party, "Longhair" protested against election oversights outside the Special Administrative Region (SAR) government as soon as he was elected.
This brings our thoughts to Taiwan and the period prior to the first legislative election. Although there had been elections for some legislative seats, they were too few, and there was no effective counterweight to old-guard politicians. The opposition movement has never won a majority, and has therefore clashed with the establishment, by focusing on the struggle to implement a democratic system. The purpose of elections is not just to collect votes, but rather to function as a link to social movements and liberate the voice of public opinion to challenge authority.
Returning to Hong Kong, the latest election has left it at a crossroads. The unfair electoral system has belittled the will of the majority and turned the mainstream into losers. This is the result of lazy public representatives. The responsibility of every politician is to promote the wishes of the public. This is the only way to save democracy in Hong Kong.
Hsu Yung-ming is an assistant research fellow at the Sun Yat-sen Institute for Social Sciences and Philosophy at the Academia Sinica.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
RSS