"All members of Legco" 避談「全體議員」定義顯智慧補選期政改方案勿提交立會

FIVE legislators have given up their seats. Howmany are "all the members of the LegislativeCouncil (Legco)" now, 55 or 60? That hasbecome an issue. Last Wednesday Legco presidentTsang Yok Yok--sing ruled that the quorum of itsproceedings remain 30. However, he refrained fromdefining "all the members of Legco" lest he shouldbreach the Basic Law. He decided to leave it to theCommittee on Rules of Procedure to discuss thematter. If "all the members of Legco" number 55, theestablishmentarians will have enough votes to get thegovernment's constitutional reform package through.Obviously, the Legco president avoided dealing withan important question when he refrained from talkingabout "all the members of Legco". His decision ispolitically judicious judicious, for nothing can be used as a, pretext for calling him partial towards theestablishmentarians. The SAR government and allparties controlling Legco seats must realise it isextraordinary for five legislators to resign at the sametime. The establishmentarians must not take advantageof the extraordinary situation to push any sensitivemotions through Legco that have anything to do with"all the members of Legco". The government must notbring its constitutional reform package before Legconow. Even if the package goes through, citizens willcondemn the government for taking advantage of theextraordinary situation, and legal challenges will ensue.

How many are "all the members of Legco"? This isan academic question that has nothing whatsoever todo with the general public. It is trivial to talk about itsdefinition in the abstract abstract. If the government pledges. not to take advantage of the situation to ask Legco tovote on its constitutional reform package when theby by--elections have yet to take place, the issue will goaway when the vacancies are filled - when there areagain 60 legislators. Society would not have to talkabout it or use any resources to have a debate aboutthe meaning of the phrase that would in now way profitHong Kong as a whole.

Legislators disagree with one another about what"all the members of Legco" means. To avoid defining itis to prevent another, heavier political storm. Under theBasic Law, only with the endorsement of two thirds of"all the members of Legco" may the following things bedone - adopting any constitutional reform, readoptingany bill the Chief Executive has refused to sign (Article49), impeaching the Chief Executive (Article 73) andamending the Basic Law (Article 159). If the SARgovernment has "all the members of Legco" definedwith a view to pushing its constitutional reform packagethrough Legco, the SAR will be plunged into fiercecontroversy about the Basic Law (Hong Kong'sconstitution). Hong Kong would lose more than it mightgain.

Five pan pan--democratic legislators having resigned,the situation is extraordinary. No parties should seizethe opportunity to push through any proposalsadvantageous to them. As the pan pan--democratic camphas not sufficient votes to block the government'spackage, even if it is adopted, the public will hardlyaccept it, and the government will go down in thepolitical history of the SAR as a byword for infamy.

Furthermore, since the definition of "all the members ofLegco" would then be at issue, heated controversywould arise, and there might well be a judicial reviewcase, which would certainly be long long--drawn drawn--out.

Because five legislators have vacated their seatsto trigger a "de facto referendum", Hong Kong politicshas deviated from its right track. What the governmentought to do is to hold by by--elections as required bystatute as soon as possible. When the number of "allthe members of Legco" is again "normal", it shoulddeal with the controversy over its constitutional reformpackage in accordance with the Basic Law so thatHong Kong politics will return to its right track.

2010.02.08明報社評

避談「全體議員」定義顯智慧補選期政改方案勿提交立會

5 名議員辭職後，立法會「全體議員」數目應是55 還是60 ，引起爭議，立法會主席曾鈺成上周三裁定，會議，法定人數維持30 人，但為免牴觸《基本法》，未有就「全體議員」下定義，交由議事規則委員會討論。如果「全體議員」被定義為55 人，建制派就有足夠人數通過政改方案，曾鈺成此時選擇避談「全體議員」，無疑是避重就輕，卻也是具有政治智慧的決定，避免予人偏幫建制派的口實。特區政府及立法會各派必須清楚認知， 5議員辭職屬「非常規時期」，議會建制派不應借機強行通過任何與「全體議員」數目有關的敏感決議，港府更不應把政改方案提上立法會表決，因為即使獲得通過，也會被指「乘機搏亂」，惹來法律挑戰。

「全體議員」應如何計算，純屬學術討論，跟社會大眾毫無關聯，抽空地討論相關定義，實屬無聊之舉。只要出缺的議席能盡快補選，議員總數盡快回復60 人，而政府亦承諾不會「偷雞」在補選未完成前把政改提交立法會表決，「全體議員」這個問題自會消失，社會就毋須為此問題來一次大辯論，也毋須耗費資源進行一場對社會整體毫無裨益的言詞及定義之爭。

避免在沒有議會各派共識的情况下為「全體議員」立下定義，也可避免另一場更大的政治風暴。根據《基本法》，涉及「全體議員」定義的立法會事務，除了政改之外，還包括再通過行政長官拒絕簽署的法案（第49條）、彈劾行政長官（第73 條）、修改《基本法》（第159 條）等等，若單為了通過政改而為「全體議員」立下定義。貪一時之快，禍延特區日後涉及《基本法》的重大憲制爭議，實在得不償失。

在有5 個議席出缺的「非常規時期」，各派也不應「抽水」，借機推動對己方有利的方案，政府更不應在補選前匆匆把政改提交立法會表決，即使勉強為之，並在只有55 名議員的情况下通過政改，也只會在特區政治歷史上留下污名。在這情况下獲通過的政改方案，由於泛民主派的否決權失效，勢難獲得公眾認受，同時由於涉及對《基本法》中「全體議員」的定義，勢將引發激烈爭拗，甚至引來司法覆核，爭議曠日持久。

5 名議員辭職補選搞「變相公投」，已令香港的政局偏離常規發展；特區政府應做的是，盡快按規定推行補選，待議會的「全體議員」人數回復「正常」後，再按《基本法》的規定處理政改的爭議，讓香港的政局走回正軌。

G lossary

judicious /d ??u: u:''ddII ʃʃ??s/ s/sensible, prudent.

academic

not connected to a practical situation andtherefore not important.

in the abstract

in a general way, without referring to aparticular real person, thing or situation.