Central government should offer concessions

L I Gang, a deputy director of the Liaison Officeof the Central People's Government in theHong Kong SAR, has met members of theDemocratic Party and then those of the Alliance forUniversal Suffrage. The democrats have proposedthat, in 2012, the additional functional constituency(FC) Legislative Council (Legco) members be returnedby all voters. Yesterday, Li Gang called that at oddswith the intent of the Basic Law, apparently bent onsentencing it to death.

According to Li Gang, as the National People'sCongress Standing Committee's decision says that, in2012, there will be as many directly elected seats asFC seats in Legco and FC voters belong to specificprofessions or groups, it is at odds with the intent ofthe Basic Law, would arouse suspicions of a breach ofthe decision and would not help bring about consensusto allow all voters to return FC legislators.

In our view, Hong Kong's constitutionalarrangements are political in nature and, in this area,legal points are of secondary importance. Judging fromhow things have developed, legal points have becomewhat the central government uses to slow down HongKong's democratisation. Li Gang's comments on theproposal in the light of what he perceives to be a pointof law are clearly inadequate. He turns a blind eye tothe political reality, and his arguments are less thanpersuasive.

Li Gang has been authorised by the centralgovernment to meet pan pan--democrats. Conceivably, histask is to find out what reforms they want the SARgovernment to carry out and give the centralgovernment a report so that it can come to a finaldecision. There is reason to believe what he hasopenly said about how the additional FC Legco seatsshould be filled is based on his usual understandings.

We do not think they represent what the centralgovernment has recently determined. We hope thecentral government will look at pan pan--democrats'proposals from a wider perspective instead of usinglegal niceties as a protective talisman talisman..Hong Kong democrats did not really concernthemselves with the 2012 electoral arrangements.

They aimed at persuading the central government toreassure Hong Kong people by saying definitely thatthey would exercise genuine universal suffrage in 2017and 2020. If it did so, they would support the SARgovernment's 2012 package despite its undemocraticfeatures. However, when they and central governmentofficials sounded one another out out, they came to, realise the central government was very unlikely to doso. Thereupon they decided to settle for second best -to make the 2012 package as democratic as possible.It is generally agreed that, unless democrats'

meetings with central government officials producepositive results, Hong Kong's political ecology willwholly tend to radicalise. Then, internal strife wouldintensify, Chief Executive Donald Tsang and hisadministration would have even greater difficultyrunning the SAR, and Hong Kong would be like a manwho, sitting on a powder keg, wonders when he will beblown to pieces.

Deputy director Li Gang has called on democratsto make political compromises. He has said, "About theconstitutional system, none can win alone; one mustallow all to win. If any party wants to win alone, all mayend up losing." From what Li Gang has said after hismeetings with members of the Democratic Party andthose of the Alliance for Universal Suffrage, citizensare quite clear who wants to win alone. Yesterday hecalled on democrats to make concessions, saying,"Take a step back and a boundless world appearsbefore you." He urged them to support the 2012package so that Hong Kong's constitutional system willprogress instead of remaining unchanged. In our view,the central government should also give some thoughtto the saying that "a boundless world will appearbefore one if one takes a step back" and try to do whatwould allow all to win. If both the democrats and thecentral government take a step back, there will be twosteps between them, and it will be much likelier forgive and take to yield positive results. Then, HongKong's political situation would suddenly clear up, andthe central authorities would no longer have to racktheir brains to deal with this issue.

All will be well if the central government saysdefinitely Hong Kong people will exercise genuineuniversal suffrage in the 2017 and 2020 elections. Thisis Hong Kong people's very humble request, and theydeserve to have genuine universal suffrage. Is it reallyso hard for the central government to grant thisrequest? Are Hong Kong people to suppose theuniversal suffrage promised them will be bogus? Thecentral government ought to answer these questions.

退一步海闊天空民主派和中央都適用

明報社評

2010.05.27

中聯辦副主任李剛先後與民主黨和普選聯會晤，對於他們所提出訴求，其中關於2012 新增功能組別交由全體選民投票，李剛昨日公開回應時，直指為不符合《基本法》原意，大有把這個訴求判處「死刑」之意。

李剛昨日回應說，人大常委會《決定》規定2012 年直選及功能組別增加的議席相等，功能組別選民是特定行業或組別人士，如交由全部選民投票產生，就不符合基本法的立法原意，並引起社會人質疑是否違反了《決定》，不利於社會形成共識。

我們認為， 香港政制安排的本質是政治問題，法律問題只屬其次，而從發展歷程看來，法律更淪為手段，中央借此阻礙香港民主化進程而已。所以，李剛只從他演繹的法理討論這個問題，顯然不足，罔顧政治實質，理據未能使人信服。

李剛獲中央授權與民主派會晤，相信他的任務是收集民主派對政改的訴求，然後向中央匯報，由中央拍板定奪。他就新增功能組別議席的選舉方式的陳述，有理由相信是按一貫理解所作的公開解釋，而非中央最高層的最新決定。我們希望， 中央日後應該從更廣闊角度審視民主派所提出的訴求，而非狹義地以法律為護身符。民主派志不在2012 年的選舉安排，他們着眼於爭取中央確認2017 和2020 年兩個選舉是真普選，以增加市民的信心，若得到中央的確認，則2012 年選舉安排之不民主實質，他們也不會計較而投票支持。但是與中央官員互相摸底過程中，民主派知道要中央確認2017 和2020 年真普選的可能性不大，於是退而求其次，爭取2012 年方案有最大的民主程度。

現在，社會上有這樣的共識，就是民主派這次與中央溝通，若未能取得積極成果，香港整體政治生態將無可避免趨向激化，屆時內耗加劇，特首曾蔭權和政府的管治倍添困難，香港就像坐在火藥桶一樣，不知道什麼時候被炸得粉身碎骨。

李剛副主任曾經勸籲民主派作出政治妥協，表示「在政制問題上，不可獨贏，只能共贏，如果只想獨贏，結果可能共輸」，按李剛與民主黨和普選聯會晤後所透露的信息，究竟是誰想獨贏呢？相信市民心中有數。昨日李剛呼籲民主派「退一步，海闊天空」，支持2012 年政改方案，使香港政制向前發展，不再原地踏步。我們認為，中央也應該想一想「退一步，海闊天空」這句話，創造共贏環境，若民主派和中央都各退一步，屆時就有兩步的迴旋空間，再經互讓互諒，達至積極成果機會大增，香港政局頓時天朗氣清，中央再也不用為這個問題傷腦筋了。

中央只要確認2017 和2020 年兩個選舉是真普選，事情就全部解決了，這是港人十分卑微的要求，而真普選也是港人應得的。確認真的那麼困難？普選難道真是假的？這是中央要回答的問題。

明報英語網「雙語社評」english.mingpao.com/critic.htm