A Devil’s Pact or A Necessary Understanding? (Letter to Hong Kong 13-9-13)

Tom Clancy, the internationally renowned spy thriller writer died lastweek at the age of 66.  In one of his books, he said this through themouth of one of his characters, “The main requirement to enter the politicalprofession was nothing more or less than the ability to be pleasant to peoplewhom you despised, and then to do business with them as if they were bosomfriends.”

While I can never claimto be able to master such an art, the philosophy behind this graphic quote isclear: in politics, you must not let your personal likes and dislikes come intoplay.  But it seems some of the PanDemocrats are doing exactly that.  Manydislike the Basic Law, especially Article 45, where it stipulates that beforethe Chief Executive of the Hong Kong SAR could be universally elected, thereshall be a Nomination Committee in charge of nomination of candidates for thepost of Chief Executive.  Still moredislike the decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’sCongress where it “offered” its “opinion” that the make –up of such NominationCommittee “may refer to” the make-up of the current Election Committee.

The current ElectionCommittee, of course, is a small circle committee, where a Pan Democrat justfinds it hard to barge in.  If one simplychanges the name of the small circle committee and call it a NominationCommittee, what hope does a Pan Democrat have in getting the necessarynomination to run for Chief Executive? So let’s rewrite the rules of nomination and let the common peoplenominate a candidate.  In a perfectworld, this is of course the ideal thing to do; and any one with true Democracyat heart can never deny this is perhaps the only right thing to do.  But this is not a perfect world.

First, the Basic Lawmentions not a hint of civil nomination. In fact, the very fact that aNomination Committee was stipulated suggests that there should be no othermeans of nomination.  Otherwise, whybother to set up a Nominating Committee?  The Pan Democrats argued that the civilnomination can be put to the Nomination Committee which can then endorse thenomination in its own name.  Yes, ofcourse it can do that and it would not be unconstitutional.  But if so, the Nomination Committee maysimply be a rubber stamp and lose the very meaning of its existence. Thatclearly was not what Beijing had in mind when it promulgated the Basic Law.

Others argued that the civilnomination can be “recommended” to the Nomination Committee and let it decidewhat to do with it. That suggestion is even more pretentious.  If the Nomination Committee simply adopts thenomination then we are back to the original argument above.  If the Nomination Committee were to deny thenomination then we will definitely have a constitutional crisis on ourhands.  Just imagine what the reaction ofthe public would be like when a small circle committee with little or nocredibility ignores the view of the public, especially in the midst of aterritory wide election for Chief Executive? The truth is, civil nominationdoes not pose a constitutional or legal problem.  It is a political problem.

You may ask, but is civil nomination the only way out?  Few Democrats dare say no.  The entire focus and all the deployableresources of the Pan Democrats have been put on the issue of civil nominationever since the topic of universal suffrage has re-emerged from last year’sLegCo election.  Any suggestion for analternative model would be viewed as “betraying” the Democratic Movement, or aDevils’ Pact.  So even though manymoderates are seriously worrying that the entire Political Reform may bederailed on the single issue of civil nomination, few dare to speak out.

But Devil’s Pact aside, is there any real alternative?  I think there is.  The reason why civil nomination was raised inthe first place is the immense distrust of the Election Committee.  For many years, “election” of the ChiefExecutive, especially the rise of C. Y. Leung, was put down as the result of a“small circle election” in the form of the Election Committee.  A small circle nomination of a candidate for ChiefExecutive is even worse because it deceives the people into thinking there isgenuine democracy when in truth there is not.

So the vice is really in the make-up of the Nomination Committee whichseriously impairs its credibility.  If wecan somehow build up the credibility of the Nomination Committee then we arehalf way there.  How?  We must remember the NPCSC merely spoke of“may refer” to the make-up of the Election Committee.  They must know it simply will not work if onewere simply to change the name tag of the Election Committee.  There must be genuine change to therepresentativeness of the Election Committee before it can qualify to becomethe Nomination Committee.  This must bethe necessary common understanding between both Beijing and the PanDemocrats.  After all, the art ofpolitics is not about defining the differences of the two sides; but the earlyidentification of the area of agreement, no matter how small that may be.  Rather than to allow the gap between Beijingand the Pan Democrats to widen the argument over civil nomination, should wenot at least devote part of our energy towards agreeing on how to reform theElection Committee?  At the very least,we owe it to Hong Kong to give it a try.