President Hu Jintao has told Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa that constitutional development beyond 2007 should be in line with the Basic Law, and that the political system must develop in line with the Basic Law and practical conditions in Hong Kong.

Mr Hu's remarks, made during Mr Tung's duty visit to Beijing this month, aptly described the political aspirations of the people of Hong Kong. For one thing, the practical situation in Hong Kong warrants a more democratic political system. The last six years of Mr Tung's governance have shown that the lack of democracy breeds instability. Hongkongers have turned their long-simmering frustrations with the government into a clamour for democratic reforms. As for the second point, the demand for direct elections for the chief executive in 2007, and for the entire legislature in 2008, is entirely in line with the Basic Law.

Democratisation has surged on Hongkongers' list of priorities, as proven by the historic protest on July 1 and the massive turnout in the District Council elections. Viewing this as a political time bomb, the mainland's Basic Law drafters and legal experts were quick to respond with a warning. They made it clear that constitutional reforms are not entirely the exclusive preserve of Hong Kong, and that if people here sought to decide the matter on their own, it would be tantamount to seeking independence.

But there is a world of difference between aspirations for democratic development and the quest for independence. What the public is upholding is the principle of one country, two systems, not two countries, two systems. The people of Hong Kong know constitutional reform has never been the exclusive preserve of the special administrative region. The Basic Law stipulates that amendments to the method for selecting the chief executive - for terms after 2007 - must have the endorsement of two-thirds of all Legislative Council members and the consent of the chief executive. Further, they need the approval of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. Hongkongers do not seek to deny Beijing a say in the process.

The bone of contention here is not the interpretation of the Basic Law. Rather, there exists a sharp divide between Hong Kong people who aspire for democracy and the Beijing leaders who have deep-rooted fears about Hong Kong using democracy to oppose the mainland.

An overwhelming 80 per cent of Hongkongers have expressed their desire for direct elections for the chief executive in 2007 and for the entire legislature in 2008. If this is passed in Legco with a two-thirds majority - but vetoed by the chief executive or the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress - this will become a constitutional crisis. A polarisation of views would only result in further instability, and should be avoided.

The sharp divide can only be bridged through understanding and dialogue. It is all the more important for Hong Kong people to air their views on why democracy is conducive to the stability of Hong Kong.

The successful implementation of the one country, two systems principle - the cornerstone on which the stability and prosperity of Hong Kong is to be built - hinges on the implementation of full democracy. A democratic system is the only safeguard for the protection of rights and the rule of law. A more open and accountable government is also a better safeguard for making and maintaining a level playing field. For Hong Kong to successfully compete in the global contest for investment and trade, an economic environment with fair competition and due process of law would be essential.

The Tung administration is facing a legitimacy crisis on an unprecedented scale. The dismantling of the ruling coalition may pose further difficulties for the administration in pushing policies through the legislature. Not only will democratic reform correct the major systemic flaws that are paralysing the administration, it now seems to be the only force that may help stabilise society.

But direct election of the chief executive with a filtering system in the form of a restrictive nomination committee - as suggested by the Democratic Alliance for Betterment of Hong Kong - works against the democratic principle. As stated in Article 45 of the Basic Law, the nomination committee should be broadly representative. The least restrictive nomination committee would be more in line with the democratic aspirations of the public.

A rational discussion of constitutional reform may help the central government understand that democratic development in Hong Kong is the only way to maintain stability. It may help them see that the right way forward can only be taken by a Hong Kong people who are willing to speak up and take firm steps towards democracy, and a Beijing leadership that is willing to listen with an open mind.

YEUNG SUM

Chairman of the Democratic Party and a directly elected Legislative

Councillor

[South China Morning Post, December 18, 2003]