SCIO briefing on 'Hong Kong: Democratic Progress Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems' white paper
0 Comment(s)
Print
E-mail China.org.cn, December 30, 2021
Kyodo News:
It is reported that the voter turnout in this Hong Kong LegCo election was a record low. Some European and American organizations, therefore, criticized it as unrepresentative. What is the comment on the Chinese side? Thank you.
Han Dayuan:
As a professor of constitutional law, I also study electoral law. The question brought up by the Japanese journalist is also what you all pay great attention to. After the election, I often heard some friends, including some foreign friends, discuss about the voter turnout. The question you raised is of wide attention, and there are also some analyses in Hong Kong society. I would like to share my observations and opinions just as a scholar.
To interpret the voter turnout, we should take an objective and comprehensive look at the election results. According to statistics, in this LegCo election, the voter turnout was 30.2% in geographical constituencies, 32.22% in functional constituencies, and 98.48% in the Election Committee constituency. The election is divided into three parts: geographical constituency election, functional constituency election, and Election Committee election. Therefore, to evaluate the election results, we should not just look at any one of the three election types but take a comprehensive view. That's my first basic idea.
Second, according to my understanding of the rule of law and democratic theory and some views from the international community, turnout is not directly equal to democracy, and the turnout figures do not necessarily indicate the level of democracy and legitimacy of elections. To directly link turnout with democracy and legitimacy or equate turnout with democracy and legitimacy, in my opinion, is at least not in accordance with the rule of law and democratic theory. We should not take turnout as the sole criterion when we observe the election results. Turnout matters because it is an expression of voters' free will, but it is not the only one. We only use it as one of the indicators of voters' engagement in the expression of political intention. We should not only look at how many people have voted, but also who the elected are, and whether they can serve every sector of society, the development of society, and especially the interests of Hong Kong as a whole and its people. As I said earlier, the elections in Hong Kong are local. As we have observed, in recent years, local elections in some Western countries have seen different levels of voter turnout. For example, the turnout in local elections in cities like New York and Los Angeles was sometimes only around 20%, and that of London Assembly elections was between 30% and 40%, which also varies. I have done some research on it. The voter turnout in this year's Tokyo metropolitan assembly election was around 42%, and that in the European Parliament elections was about 20%. Therefore, the voter turnout in different countries and regions is affected by a combination of factors, so we should not just look at the turnout.
Besides, the reform of the electoral system this time, from designing to practical implementation, was under a tight schedule, as the central government had to make a general plan, and the HKSAR needed to implement the plan well. Therefore, all involved parties needed time to adjust to and comprehend the new system. Notably, the electoral procedures and rules of the new system are indeed complex, so it is understandable that some voters are still getting familiar with the system or looking on. The key to the electoral system lies in its inclusiveness and balance. Given that the reform was carried out against the backdrop of the disordered and chaotic HKSAR LegCo, we should fully respect voters as they take time to comprehend the transformation from an old electoral system to a new one. It is normal that some voters are looking on, and some might even be dissatisfied. We should show respect whether they voted or not and whoever they voted for. The common wish of the electorate is an orderly, prosperous, and steady Hong Kong. The voters will reach a consensus on the new electoral system over time. About the voter turnout this time, there are three points we need to make clear and hope you will notice. First, the Hong Kong elections in the past were highly politicalized, so there were more political issues and less issues about people's livelihood. The most significant change and highlight of the elections this time was that the candidates paid much attention to issues about people's livelihood and the economy. Therefore, the electoral culture is changing from an unhealthy one caused by political rifts in the past to one with people's livelihood as its core, which is a gradual process. Second, we noticed disruption from some anti-China forces from the West, including instigators of disorder in Hong Kong. For instance, some of those forces called for no voting, and some so-called poll organizations in Hong Kong disturbed the free choices of voters by polls. One more thing is that the meeting mechanism between Hong Kong's electorate and the candidates is flexible, but due to the pandemic, no more activities were arranged this time. Voter turnout is under the comprehensive influence of various factors, and we should take an objective and comprehensive approach to analyze it.
Despite different views, the most significant success of the reform is the sound implementation of a good electoral system. Therefore, we should have objective evaluations. Thank you.
Wang Zhenmin:
I want to add one point. I paid particular attention to the New York City elections last month, the voter turnout of which was 24%. NYC has a population of 8 million, while Hong Kong has a population of 7.5 million. The electorate of NYC is more than that of Hong Kong, but only 1.3 million people voted in the NYC elections, in contrast to the 1.35 million in the Hong Kong elections. Voter turnout is not the critical point. Besides, there is a phenomenon in the US that the voter turnouts of state-, city- and county-level elections are lower than that of the federal elections. However, many public opinion polls suggested that American people may trust local governments more. A survey indicates that voter turnout is like drawing blood, which is intended to examine if the body has problems, but you don't have to draw too much and one tube of blood is enough. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party severely struggle with each other on voter turnout. The Democratic Party wants to make it high, while the Republican Party wants to keep it low, believing if the Democratic Party has a high voter turnout, the Republican Party can never win. So, voter turnout in this case is not an issue truly reflecting democracy but an issue affecting election victory, which is the fundamental concern. Thank you.
Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)