‘Patriots Only’: Hong Kong’s New Election System in Action

Originally published at The Diplomat on Dec 1, 2021. Credit: AP Photo/Vincent Yu

By Jessie Lau and Shui-yin Sharon Yam

At this time, Hong Kong is usually buzzing with political activity. Every four years, in the run up to elections for the Legislative Council (LegCo) – the city’s parliament – the streets would come alive as hopeful politicians take part in animated campaigns to win supporters, shouting promises into megaphones in a sea of colorful banners.

This year, there is no such energy on display.

The upcoming LegCo election in late December will be the second major election to take place after Beijing imposed a sweeping national security law (NSL) on the city last year, a law that criminalized broad forms of dissent. Originally scheduled for 2020, right at the heel of a large-scale pro-democracy movement, the election was postponed to this year by authorities, who cited coronavirus-related concerns.

Since then, the Chinese and Hong Kong government have implemented a series of dramatic changes to the electoral processes, such as cutting the number of directly elected seats and implementing a rigorous vetting process for candidates, which must first be approved as “patriots” in order to run. Designed by Beijing and approved by pro-government Hong Kong lawmakers, the sweeping changes effectively sever any pathways for dissenting voices to be elected into the legislative body.

“Candidates will not know whether they will be chucked out or not,” Emily Lau, former chairperson of the Democratic Party who served as a legislative councillor between 1991 and 2016, told The Diplomat. “This is very much unlike the elections I’ve taken part in, and hence why I said very early on when they [announced they] were going to revamp the system that my party should not take part.”

A Political Shake-up of the System

Under the new framework, the Election Committee has overwhelming political power in shaping the LegCo election. The reformed Election Committee is composed of industry representatives and pro-government individuals who are avid allies of Beijing – only one member of the Committee represents the oppositional camp.

After the restructuring, the 1,500 members of the committee are now responsible not only for “electing” the chief executive of Hong Kong, but they will also nominate and appoint 40 of the committee’s own members to serve concurrently in the 90-seat legislature. LegCo will now only have 20 directly-elected seats. The remaining 30 seats will be occupied by candidates from the functional constituencies to represent sectors such as finance, labor, and real estate. Introduced during the British colonial era, functional constituencies allow elites in special interest groups to vote in lieu of the wider public.

As economics scholar Leo Goodstadt pointed out: “Functional constituencies have consistently been structured to ensure in the first place that a convenient number of seats in the legislature would be pro-government.” Indeed, seats in then functional constituencies have historically been held by pro-establishment candidates.

Prior to the restructuring, Hong Kong citizens were able to elect 40 out of 70 legislators through universal suffrage, which amounted to 53 percent of the seats. Under the new framework, however, the percentage of directly elected legislators drops to only 22 percent. It is important to note that even prior to such changes, the LegCo did not possess much legislative power, as Beijing’s National People’s Congress has the ultimate authority in determining Hong Kong’s legislation.

Early last year, prior to these electoral changes and the passage of the NSL, pro-democracy activists were actively forming new trade unions so they could compete for seats in the functional constituencies, potentially winning more than half the seats in the LegCo.

Since the postponement of last year’s LegCo election, however, many civil society and advocacy organizations, including the Hong Kong Confederate of Trade Unions, have chosen to disband under immense political pressure. The plan to pack the legislature with pro-democracy voices, hence, is no longer possible. Pro-democracy activists’ earlier plan to do so had landed 47 of them in prison for “conspiracy to commit subversion.”

“They’re cutting out competition and anyone they see as a threat,” said a former pro-democracy campaigner in their early 20s, who asked to be identified only as Bobby. These developments mean that any elected councillors will have even less power to enact legislative changes than in the past, Bobby added.

“I’m not going to vote. It’s a sham and there’s no point.”

Patriots Only

The new changes drastically affected the ratio of lawmakers who were appointed and those who were elected by universal suffrage. Prior to the new electoral framework, 35 out of 70 seats were elected by the Hong Kong public on a one-person one-vote basis. In addition, five additional seats were reserved for candidates who were nominated by or who were incumbent district councillors.

In 2019, much to the ire of Beijing, candidates from the pro-democracy camp successfully captured the majority of seats in the District Council election. In other words, while imperfect, the previous electoral system allowed the public to directly elect over half the seats in the legislature. Under the new system, only 22 percent of lawmakers will be directly elected by the public.

In addition to significantly lowering the number of directly elected lawmakers, under the new electoral system, candidates must undergo a rigorous vetting process which includes close scrutiny by the Hong Kong National Security Police.

Appointed by the chief executive, the seven members of the vetting committee will determine the eligibility of each candidate to run in the election. Chief Executive Carrie Lam noted that the vetting committee would prevent any “non-patriots” from running in the election. Opposition politicians and pro-democracy activists, in other words, will likely not be eligible to run.

Since candidates must also be investigated by the National Security Police, opposition politicians and pro-democracy activists run the risk of being incriminated as the national security law has been used to suppress dissent. Since the beginning of 2021, many prominent pro-democracy activists and politicians have been charged with violating the NSL and are currently imprisoned.

To Run or Not to Run?

Given these new electoral changes, which are meant to suppress dissenting voices in the legislature, the Democratic Party was torn about whether to participate in an electoral system that would overwhelmingly favor pro-Beijing candidates. While some party members argued that Democrats should continue to run in the election – in part to help shield the party and themselves from political persecution and criticisms from Beijing – the majority of members preferred to boycott the election altogether.

“I think it’s quite humiliating that you have to be vetted like that,” Lau said. “Some who claim to be non-establishment have to make public pleas for support because they could not get the required nominations. Only after that [did] a few manage to get nominations. It’s a very complicated and difficult process, and those who are able to be nominated are those people haven’t heard of, or cannot contact.”

At the end of September 2021, after political pressure from prominent pro-Beijing figure Lo Man-Tuen, the Democratic Party allowed members to nominate candidates to run in the upcoming LegCo election. Lo argued that the party would be seen as hostile to Beijing should they boycott the election altogether. Among party members who advocated for participating in the election, several of them are ineligible to run as they were disqualified over the recent oath-taking requirement for district councillors.

On October 11, the Democratic Party announced that no members had submitted an application to join the race. The only member who expressed interest in running in the election failed to secure the necessary number of nominations from within the party.

LegCo hopefuls from other opposition parties also faced an uphill battle to garner nominations. For instance, all five members of Path of Democracy, a think tank founded by politician and Executive Councillor Ronny Tong Ka-wah of the pro-democracy Civic Party, failed to secure the nominations required to participate.

After a strenuous two-hour internal meeting in mid-October, the Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People’s Livelihood, a moderate grassroots pro-democracy party, announced that its members may sign up to run in the LegCo election. Despite skepticism and criticisms from some of the association’s supporters, Acting Chairman Yeung Yuk remarked, “We don’t want the LegCo to have one type of voice only.”

A Facade of Competition

Following the end of the nomination period, news emerged that for the first time in Hong Kong’s history, every constituency will be contested in the election. Experts say Beijing is keen to see competition in the election, which many have dismissed as a sham process, in order to maintain the facade of legitimacy.

Although some hope this will encourage the public to come out to vote, scholars say the lack of opposition candidates will still deter many from participating. In a possible preview, September turnout at Macau’s seventh legislative elections hit a historic low after pro-democracy and liberal candidates were disqualified earlier this year.

“I don’t know how many will turn out, and how many who used to support the pro-democracy candidates will vote, but I’m not optimistic,” Lau said. “I think people are just not happy that some of the people they used to vote for are not taking part.”

Pro-establishment figures such as Jasper Tsang and Siu Kai Lau have also made comments to manage the public’s expectations for a low turnout.

Ka Ming Chan, a Hong Kong researcher who is now a doctoral candidate of political science at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, echoed Lau’s sentiments and predicted that not many will choose to participate.

In a May paper co-authored by Chan that analyzes voting behavior in the city following the 2016 election (when “radical” lawmakers were disqualified by the authorities), he found that as the perceived “fairness” of elections decreases, supporters of the opposition appear to be less incentivized to vote. They also see participating in the election process as less important.

The fact that every seat is being contested is “noteworthy,” however, because it suggests the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is using the election as an opportunity to evaluate pro-establishment politicians, in addition to “creating a facade of real election,” according to Chan.

“The CCP would like to have manageable competition among establishment elites in order to test different candidates’ competence and the mobilizing power of different factions,” Chan said, adding that he has also been surprised at the transparency of the nomination process.

“It’s so transparent that the media can identify who nominated whom,” he said. “As such, it would be interesting to see to what extent these legislators’ policy positions correspond to their clients, and how they deviate from the line of the local government.”

A Hostile Political Climate

In the run up to the elections, the situation feels bleak to supporters of the pro-democracy movement. As many consider whether or not to participate in the process, authorities have also clamped down on efforts to boycott the race.

In early November, three were arrested for reportedly sharing an online appeal encouraging people to cast blank votes in the upcoming polls. They were accused of violating the city’s Election Ordinance, which forbids inciting another person not to vote or to cast an invalid vote.

Breaching the new ordinance could result in a jail sentence of up to three years and a maximum fine of HK$200,000 (or US$25,672). The incident came after former lawmaker Ted Hui, who is now in self-exile in Australia, shared a post asking Hong Kongers to cast a blank vote to “resist the unjust system.”

Paul, not his real name, is still deciding whether or not to vote. A campaigner for a non-profit organization in his mid-20s, he’s concerned that his actions will have consequences on his work, which is heavily dependent on collaboration with government officials.

“There’s speculation over whether these people are already bowing to Beijing, or have been compromised morally,” Paul said. “We don’t have compulsory voting, but discussion over how to vote is now outlawed. There are all these conspiracy theories. Even discussing the act of putting in invalid votes would now be illegal.”

Last summer, Paul took part in an unofficial democratic primary to determine candidates for the LegCo election that drew over 600,000 voters. In January, those who took part in holding last year’s unofficial referendum – including all the pro-democracy candidates and organizers – were detained in a spate of unprecedented raids and arrested on charges of subversion.

For Bobby, who took part in campaigning for a pro-democracy party in the unofficial referendum, the atmosphere on the ground now feels drastically different. Since any potential candidates or nominees who harbor any anti-government sentiment will not pass the new vetting process, it will be difficult for people to build any sort of meaningful campaigns that address critical issues in Hong Kong society, Bobby explained.

“Now we don’t see any campaigning at all, and I don’t think there will be any. To campaign you need a clear platform. You develop an agenda according to the people you want to represent,” Bobby said. “But now, how would you even campaign? Would you say: ‘vote for me, I’m not going to do anything useful?’ It would be such a joke!”

Looking Ahead to Election Day

After the confirmation of the 153 candidates who will take part in the upcoming election, the Public Opinion Research Institute released a survey revealing that more than half of voters are unsure of who is running for direct seats in their constituencies.

The poll also showed that only 52 percent of respondents were willing to vote, the lowest proportion since polls began in 1991. Since the survey’s release, the institution has come under fire from pro-Beijing outfit Ta Kung Pao, which has accused the poll of “inciting” people not to vote.

To facilitate voting for Hong Kongers in mainland China, the government will set up three polling locations on the China-Hong Kong border. Citing the pandemic, the government would not allow the public to observe vote counting in these sites. Critics argued that these polling sites were set up to help boost voting rates.

About one-third of candidates, most of whom are running in functional constituencies or members of the new Election Committee, also failed to supply contact details on their nomination forms to allow the public and press to contact them. Only three identified as “pro-democracy” and only four mentioned universal suffrage, a promise enshrined in the city’s mini constitution the Basic Law, in their campaigns.

“We have to live in hope. I hope some of these people, if they enter LegCo, will have the courage and integrity to speak out for the Hong Kong people. I hope Beijing will allow dissenting views to be expressed,” Lau said. “I think the situation is testing us, to see how much courage, perseverance, ingenuity, and wisdom we have.”