China’s autocrats end democracy in Hong Kong

The preamble of the Chinese constitution refers to China as a “people’s democratic dictatorship led by the working class.” The economic system in place is a “socialist market economy,” which combines private ownership (market) with a responsibility for the collective (socialism).

In the case of Hong Kong, they came up with “one country, two systems,” “Hong Kong administration by Hong Kongers” and “a high-level of autonomy” — principles agreed upon by Beijing and London before the former British colony was handed over to China in 1997. These principles resulted in Hong Kong’s Basic Law, which meets international democratic standards.

The Basic Law, however, has a catch: The charter does provide for direct and general elections to elect the territory’s parliament and chief executive, but it doesn’t set a time frame for it to happen. This has given Beijing room to manoeuvre. Free and representative elections are considered the benchmark for any democracy. In Hong Kong, elections do indeed take place, but always with an invisible player in action. The player’s name does not appear anywhere, but pulls the strings everywhere. The player wants to have everything under control in order to stifle even the slightest criticism at the outset. And its name is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Since Hong Kong came under Chinese control, Beijing has prevented popular sovereignty in the territory. This is because only half of the 70-member city parliament is directly elected; the other half is appointed by selected community and social groups. The election of the chief executive must be confirmed by a Beijing-friendly commission. The next legislative elections are scheduled for September, after they were delayed by a year due to the coronavirus pandemic. And the next chief executive election will be in 2022.

The new resolution, passed on Thursday with 2,895 votes in favor, 0 against and one abstention, stipulates that all candidates for the upcoming parliamentary elections, as well as candidates for the chief executive, will be screened for attitudes and approved by the same Beijing-friendly commission. This is to ensure that all candidates for office are “patriots.” To pick up on the propaganda’s choice of words, “people who love the country rule Hong Kong.” So not those who love Hong Kong, but the autocracy. From Beijing’s standpoint, opposition parties from the pro-democratic camp do not belong to the patriots.

After all, they criticize the Hong Kong administration’s obedience to Beijing authorities and demand the right to general, free elections in accordance with the Basic Law.

Beijing wants to turn the Hong Kong City Parliament into a rubber-stamp legislature like the National People’s Congress. Before the 1997 handover, China had promised to guarantee the rule of law in Hong Kong, but not to give way about who makes the laws. In recent years, calls for direct elections have grown louder in Hong Kong. As a result, the pro-Beijing majority in the city parliament is no longer considered secure in the next elections.

The architects of Hong Kong’s Basic Law wanted to ensure stability and prosperity in Hong Kong with the principle of one country, two systems. In this democratic experiment, they completely underestimated the fact that the autocrats in Beijing are clearly in the driver’s seat. And that the CCP leadership probably never seriously wanted to grant the people of Hong Kong what they had honestly hoped for after the end of the British colonial era: genuine democracy and self-government.