Jump to content

Democracy in Hong Kong: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 52: Line 52:
In a surprise move, the government unveiled the revised package before they were scheduled. Key proposals, such as increasing the Election Committee for the chief executive election from 800 members to 1,200 in 2012 and increasing the number of Legislative Council members from 60 to 70, remain unchanged. It was proposed that the five additional Legco seats for the district council constituency will be elected by proportional representation instead of block voting as suggested by pan- democrats. The proposals will be put before Legco before the summer recess. Chief Secretary Henry Tang said the government tried to find the "maximum latitude to enhance the democratic elements of the two elections in 2012." He urged legislators to accept this 'golden opportunity' because there was no room for further concessions.<ref>Lee, Diana, (15 April 2010). [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=96973&sid=27736844&con_type=1&d_str=20100415&fc=7 'Grab this golden chance'], ''The Standard''</ref> Qiao Xiaoyang, head of the NPC's Hong Kong Basic Law committee, said the reason the Standing Committee ruled that Hong Kong "may" and not "must" have universal suffrage for the 2017 chief executive and 2020 Legislative Council elections was because any change in electoral methods required approval by local lawmakers. He added that passage of the reform package would "create excellent conditions for universal suffrage in the future."<ref>Lee, Colleen (15 April 2010) [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=96965&sid=27736915&con_type=1&d_str=20100415&fc=7 Qiao adds clout to reforms], ''The Standard''</ref> Civic Party lawmaker Audrey Eu Yuet-mee said her party will not accept the "regressive and unacceptable" reform package, that increases the number of functional constituency seats.<ref name=hks27778167>Lee, Colleen (19 April 2012). [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=97077&sid=27778167&con_type=1&d_str=20100419&sear_year=2010 Poll plan a big step forward, insists Lam], ''The Standard''</ref> However, Constitutional Affairs minister Stephen Lam insists the 2012 electoral reform proposal is more democratic than the 2005 package which was voted down by the Legislative Council, and was more likely to advance the city's political system if approved. He said that the timetable of universal suffrage in 2017 and 2020 was not an ideal, but was "a practical one that is accepted by over 60 percent of residents."<ref name=hks27778167/>
In a surprise move, the government unveiled the revised package before they were scheduled. Key proposals, such as increasing the Election Committee for the chief executive election from 800 members to 1,200 in 2012 and increasing the number of Legislative Council members from 60 to 70, remain unchanged. It was proposed that the five additional Legco seats for the district council constituency will be elected by proportional representation instead of block voting as suggested by pan- democrats. The proposals will be put before Legco before the summer recess. Chief Secretary Henry Tang said the government tried to find the "maximum latitude to enhance the democratic elements of the two elections in 2012." He urged legislators to accept this 'golden opportunity' because there was no room for further concessions.<ref>Lee, Diana, (15 April 2010). [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=96973&sid=27736844&con_type=1&d_str=20100415&fc=7 'Grab this golden chance'], ''The Standard''</ref> Qiao Xiaoyang, head of the NPC's Hong Kong Basic Law committee, said the reason the Standing Committee ruled that Hong Kong "may" and not "must" have universal suffrage for the 2017 chief executive and 2020 Legislative Council elections was because any change in electoral methods required approval by local lawmakers. He added that passage of the reform package would "create excellent conditions for universal suffrage in the future."<ref>Lee, Colleen (15 April 2010) [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=96965&sid=27736915&con_type=1&d_str=20100415&fc=7 Qiao adds clout to reforms], ''The Standard''</ref> Civic Party lawmaker Audrey Eu Yuet-mee said her party will not accept the "regressive and unacceptable" reform package, that increases the number of functional constituency seats.<ref name=hks27778167>Lee, Colleen (19 April 2012). [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=97077&sid=27778167&con_type=1&d_str=20100419&sear_year=2010 Poll plan a big step forward, insists Lam], ''The Standard''</ref> However, Constitutional Affairs minister Stephen Lam insists the 2012 electoral reform proposal is more democratic than the 2005 package which was voted down by the Legislative Council, and was more likely to advance the city's political system if approved. He said that the timetable of universal suffrage in 2017 and 2020 was not an ideal, but was "a practical one that is accepted by over 60 percent of residents."<ref name=hks27778167/>


Pan-democrats expressed their deep disappointment with the proposals; their 18 legislators intimated their preparedness to vote down the package if no further progress is made on democracy.<ref>Lee, Colleen (15 April 2010) [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=96974&sid=27736845&con_type=1&d_str=20100415&fc=7 Pan-democrats set to vote down package], ''The Standard''</ref> The [[Alliance for Universal Suffrage]], an umbrella group of moderate pan-democrats which counts 15 legislators as its members, asked for guarantees of the abolition of functional constituencies before they would accept an increase in the governments proposed district council functional constituencies.<ref>Wong, Albert (26 April 2010). "Pan-democrat alliance indicates it will reject political reform package", ''South China Morning Post''</ref><ref name=sink>{{cite web |url=http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=30&art_id=93510&sid=26784783&con_type=1&d_str=20100122&sear_year=2010 |title=Vow to sink early move on reform plan |author=Chiang, Scarlett |date=26 April 2010 |work= The Standard |accessdate=26 April 2010}}</ref>
Pan-democrats expressed their deep disappointment with the proposals; their 18 legislators intimated their preparedness to vote down the package if no further progress is made on democracy.<ref>Lee, Colleen (15 April 2010) [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=96974&sid=27736845&con_type=1&d_str=20100415&fc=7 Pan-democrats set to vote down package], ''The Standard''</ref> The [[Alliance for Universal Suffrage]], an umbrella group of moderate pan-democrats which counts 15 legislators as its members, asked for guarantees of the abolition of functional constituencies before they would accept an increase in the governments proposed district council functional constituencies.<ref>Wong, Albert (26 April 2010). "Pan-democrat alliance indicates it will reject political reform package", ''South China Morning Post''</ref><ref name=sink>{{cite web |url=http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=30&art_id=93510&sid=26784783&con_type=1&d_str=20100122&sear_year=2010 |title=Vow to sink early move on reform plan |author=Chiang, Scarlett |date=26 April 2010 |work= The Standard |accessdate=26 April 2010}}</ref> LegCo president Jasper Tsang triggered controversy when he indicated his willingness to resign his post to vote for reform proposals, suggesting 3 pan-democrats might break ranks.<ref name=marchers>Wong Albert & Cheung, Simpson (3 May 2010) "Marchers call for more progressive reforms", '' South China Morning Post''</ref> He said "Government officials probably also agree my vote is more important than my being Legco president. My post can be temporarily taken by someone else."<ref name=quit>Moy, Patsy (30 April 2010). [http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=97642&sid=28066409&con_type=1&d_str=20100430&sear_year=2010 Quit threat over key reform vote], '' The Standard''</ref>


===Timeline===
===Timeline===

Revision as of 05:58, 3 May 2010

Democratic development in Hong Kong
leaders of a protest march holding open a large banner with the figure '2012' in black and white print
Democracy protesters on 13 Jan 2008 demanding universal suffrage by 2012
Date1997 –
LocationHong Kong
ParticipantsHK Govt., LegCo, Pan-democrats, people of Hong Kong
Politics and government
of Hong Kong
Laws
Executive
  • University Grants Committee Secretariat
  • Working Family and Student Financial Assistance Agency
Legislature
  • Political camps:
Judiciary
Court of Final Appeal

High Court

District Court

  • Chief District Judge: Justin Ko

Magistrates' Court

  • Chief Magistrate: So Wai-tak

Special courts and tribunals:

Districts
District Officers
Elections
Electoral Affairs Commission

Chief Executive Elections

Legislative elections

District council elections
Foreign relations
Documents

Consular missions in Hong Kong

Hong Kong–China relations

Hong Kong–Taiwan relations

Related topics
flag Hong Kong portal

Democratic development in Hong Kong has been a major topic since the transfer of sovereignty to China in 1997. The One country, two systems principle allows the Hong Kong government to administer all areas of government except foreign relations and (military) defense separately from the national Chinese government. Many Hong Kong citizens became concerned about democratic development when the first Chief executive of Hong Kong Tung Chee-hwa appeared to have mishandled this issue. Other democracy-related issues involving human rights and universal suffrage became the new focal point for the pro-democracy camp. Nevertheless, it should be stressed that . Attempts to bring Hong Kong citizens on to the negotiatiing table by the British during the Sino-Anglo discussions was rejected by Beijing during the early 1980s. The last governor Chris Patten faced a great deal of opposition in changing the former colony's political system.

1980s

See also: Elections in Hong Kong

Although full universal suffrage was never granted by the British to its colony before the handover in 1997, some democratisation began in 1984: a Green paper on development of representative government was issued by the colonial government in July 1984 with proposals aimed at developing a system of more localised government; it proposed the introduction of indirect elections to the Legco the following year.[1]

Democracy activists - pressure groups, religious groups and community organisations - attended a mass rally at Ko Shan Theatre in Hung Hom in November 1986. The rally is a milestone in Hong Kong's fledgling pro-democracy movement. One if the participating groups, calling themselves the 'group of 190', demanded direct elections for Legco in 1988, and a faster pace of democratic development after the handover.[1]

In 1987, many surveys indicated that there was more than 60 per cent popular support for direct elections. The government issued another green paper in 1987 proposing direct LegCo elections for 1988. However, the proposal was ruled out after a government study concluded people were 'sharply divided' over its introduction that year. The government was criticised for manipulating the views of some Beijing-friendly groups to ensure that no clear mandate for direct elections in 1988 emerged. Eventually the government decided to introduce 18 directly elected seats to the legislature in 1991.[1]

Post-1997

However, under what Beijing called the 'one country, two systems' model, the move towards greater democracy has stalled. An article in Journal of Democracy argues that "Hong Kong’s political development has lagged in the face of well-documented PRC efforts to impede progress toward direct elections, universal suffrage, and other democratizing reforms that Beijing fears might loosen its control."[2]

During the 1996 election a 400-member HK SAR Selection Committee (推選委員會) voted for a Chief Executive to govern Hong Kong after 1997.[3] Pro-democracy activists, including Emily Lau, Andrew Cheng, and Lee Cheuk-yan, have insisted this threatened Hong Kong's welfare by denying the city full democracy. A "Tomb of democracy" was established outside the building shouting "oppose the phony election". The activists were detained and dragged away by the police for four hours.[3]

Pan-democrat groups such as the Article 45 Concern Group and the Hong Kong Government agree on the interpretation that Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45 indicates universal suffrage as the ultimate aim. However, they differ on the pace of implementing universal suffrage.[4]

Universal suffrage

A main topic by the political parties in Hong Kong has been universal suffrage which would allow Hong Kong citizens to choose their local representatives. The Pan-democrats, especially, have voiced concerns that small-circle elections and the undemocratic functional constituencies threaten Hong Kong's autonomy granted to them by the Basic Law.[5]

2004 package

Chief Secretary Donald Tsang released the fourth report on political reform on 15 December, and launched a three-month consultation over the methods of electing the chief executive and the legislature in 2007-08; it looks into whether the size and composition of Election Committee and Legco. Tsang indicated he will not consider any proposals which are in conflict with the National People's Congress (NPC) Standing Committee's veto of universal suffrage in April.[6]

After the failure to achieve universal suffrage in 2007, the target of the pan-democrats has shifted to 2012; pro-Beijing camp stated its preference for 2017. The Pan-democrats are concerned that the lack of details regarding governance in Hong Kong after July 2047, when the One country, two systems 50-year guarantee granted by the Basic Law expires.

On 29 December 2007, the NPCSC resolved[7] that:

that the election of the fifth Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the year 2017 may be implemented by the method of universal suffrage; that after the Chief Executive is selected by universal suffrage, the election of the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region may be implemented by the method of electing all the members by universal suffrage... Appropriate amendments conforming to the principle of gradual and orderly progress may be made to the specific method for selecting the fourth Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the year 2012 and the specific method for forming the fifth term Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the year 2012 in accordance with the provisions of Articles 45 and 68, and those of Article 7 of Annex I and Article III of Annex II to the Basic Law

The decision stipulated that:

The only certainty is that Hong Kong will get exactly what Beijing wants it to have, which is exactly zilch.

Asia Times, 11 January 2008[8]

The bills on the amendments to the method for selecting the Chief Executive and the proposed amendments to such bills shall be introduced by the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to the Legislative Council; such amendments must be made with the endorsement of a two-thirds majority of all the members of the Legislative Council and the consent of the Chief Executive

The Asia Times remarked that both proposals for LegCo and for the Chief Executive "hedged in with so many ifs and buts that there is no guarantee of Hong Kong getting anything at all... "[8]

2009 package

On 18 November 2009, the government published the "Consultation Document on the Methods for Selecting the Chief Executive and for Forming the LegCo in 2012", which they said broadened the scope of political participation and increase substantially the democratic elements in the 2012 elections. The administration opened three-month consultations with proposals to enlarge the Election Committee for electing the Chief Executive, and creating ten new LegCo seats. The administration also proposed to give elected District Council members more seats on the Election Committee, and five of the new LegCo seats.[9] The consultation ended with 47,200 written submissions received.[10]

The Democratic Party condemned the consultation document for failing to bring in dual universal suffrage (for LegCo and for the Chief Executive elections) by 2012,[11] and again demanded the functional constituencies, which were untouched by the proposal, to be abolished for good.[12] However, the Democratic Party stopped short of refusing the proposal outright, and expressed the view that if there is no universal suffrage in 2012, the proposal must state that there will be 'real' universal suffrage in 2017 and 2020.

In the meantime, in January 2010, five Pan-democrat legislators resigned their seats as part of the 'Five Constituencies Resignation' concept for meaningful political reform; Albert Chan, Alan Leong, Tanya Chan, "Longhair" Leung Kwok-hung and Raymond Wong resigned from LegCo.[13] Their resignations were submitted on 26 January 2010, with effect on 29 January 2010.[14] Beijing warned the five MPs not to resign; Chief Executive Donald Tsang said the "so-called referendum" had no legal grounding.[15]

In a surprise move, the government unveiled the revised package before they were scheduled. Key proposals, such as increasing the Election Committee for the chief executive election from 800 members to 1,200 in 2012 and increasing the number of Legislative Council members from 60 to 70, remain unchanged. It was proposed that the five additional Legco seats for the district council constituency will be elected by proportional representation instead of block voting as suggested by pan- democrats. The proposals will be put before Legco before the summer recess. Chief Secretary Henry Tang said the government tried to find the "maximum latitude to enhance the democratic elements of the two elections in 2012." He urged legislators to accept this 'golden opportunity' because there was no room for further concessions.[16] Qiao Xiaoyang, head of the NPC's Hong Kong Basic Law committee, said the reason the Standing Committee ruled that Hong Kong "may" and not "must" have universal suffrage for the 2017 chief executive and 2020 Legislative Council elections was because any change in electoral methods required approval by local lawmakers. He added that passage of the reform package would "create excellent conditions for universal suffrage in the future."[17] Civic Party lawmaker Audrey Eu Yuet-mee said her party will not accept the "regressive and unacceptable" reform package, that increases the number of functional constituency seats.[18] However, Constitutional Affairs minister Stephen Lam insists the 2012 electoral reform proposal is more democratic than the 2005 package which was voted down by the Legislative Council, and was more likely to advance the city's political system if approved. He said that the timetable of universal suffrage in 2017 and 2020 was not an ideal, but was "a practical one that is accepted by over 60 percent of residents."[18]

Pan-democrats expressed their deep disappointment with the proposals; their 18 legislators intimated their preparedness to vote down the package if no further progress is made on democracy.[19] The Alliance for Universal Suffrage, an umbrella group of moderate pan-democrats which counts 15 legislators as its members, asked for guarantees of the abolition of functional constituencies before they would accept an increase in the governments proposed district council functional constituencies.[20][21] LegCo president Jasper Tsang triggered controversy when he indicated his willingness to resign his post to vote for reform proposals, suggesting 3 pan-democrats might break ranks.[22] He said "Government officials probably also agree my vote is more important than my being Legco president. My post can be temporarily taken by someone else."[23]

Timeline

  • July 1984 - Hong Kong government releases green paper on development of representative government, which proposes the introduction of indirect Legislative Council elections in 1985
  • Sepember 1984 - British and Chinese governments sign Sino-British Joint Declaration
  • Sepember 1985 - Indirect elections introduced to Legco
  • November 1986 - More than 1,000 people join mass rally at Ko Shan Theatre, demanding faster pace of democracy after 1997
  • May 1987 - Hong Kong government releases green paper on development of representative government, which suggests direct election to Legco as option for following year
  • April 1989 - Tiananmen Square protests of 1989
  • 1990 - Hong Kong Basic Law endorsed by National People's Congress
  • 1992 - Governor Chris Patten announces reform package for 1994-95 elections
  • December 1996 - Provisional Legislative Council set up
  • May 1998 - First post-handover LegCo election held
  • 1 July 2003 - 500,000 join historic march against proposed codification of Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23
  • 29 November 2004: A motion before LegCo proposed by Fernando Cheung calling for a referendum to gauge the views of the public on the introduction of universal suffrage in 2007-08 was scuppered by the pro-Beijing camp - DAB, the Liberal Party and the Alliance - by 31 votes to 20.[24]
  • 16 December 2004: Hong Kong government launches public consultation on electoral methods for 2007-08 elections
  • 2005: Government proposal for 2007-08 elections vetoed by Legco
  • Jul 2007: Government releases Green Paper on Constitutional Development
  • 29 December 2007 - The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress deputy secretary general, Qiao Xiaoyang, visited Hong Kong to rule out universal suffrage being introduced by 2012. About 700 protesters marched to the Government House, where Mr Qiao was to brief lawmakers and district councillors on the decision.[25]
  • 1 January 2008 - Pan-democrats expressed regret about the rejection of universal suffrage in 2012, but said they would continue to fight for the early introduction of full democracy. They warned about "fake universal suffrage" being promised given that details of the 2017 and 2020 polls were not settled. Martin Lee said Beijing’s proposals were “full of blanks” and contained no concrete details. “I do not see Hong Kong with genuine democracy in 10 years more or 20 years more. It is just a mirage."[26]
  • 13 January 2008 - Pan-democrats gathered a petition of 10,000 signatures demanding universal suffrage in 2012.[27] Pro-Beijing members have welcomed this decision to grant universal suffrage by 2017 as "expressing the wishes of the people", as has been written in the Chief Executive's report regarding democratic development for the Region.[28] A peaceful protest against the National People's Congress Standing Committee's delay of universal suffrage to 2017 was held by 22,000 people. The march went from Victoria park to the Central Government Offices.[8]
  • July 2009 - The League of Social Democrats (LSD) proposed the 'Five Constituencies Resignation' plan in mid July 2009. They proposed that LegCo members of the pan-democracy camp resign according to the size of their caucus in LegCo: 2 members from Democratic Party, 1 member from Civic Party, 1 member from LSD and 1 member from the 4 independent democrats to force a de fact referendum on universal suffrage.[30]
  • 18 November 2009 - The Government published the "Consultation Document on the Methods for Selecting the Chief Executive and for Forming the LegCo in 2012" on.
  • 21 December 2009 - Lew Mon-hung, member of the CPPCC said "Hong Kong is part of China, some people are mistaken if they think Hong Kong could have its own political system."[31]

Gallery

  • Protesters urged that "Democracy delayed is democracy denied".
    Protesters urged that "Democracy delayed is democracy denied".
  • An estimated 22,000 protesters showed up
    An estimated 22,000 protesters showed up
  • 'Long Hair' and 'Mad Dog' speaking at a rally in 2008
    'Long Hair' and 'Mad Dog' speaking at a rally in 2008

See also

References

Footnotes

  1. ^ a b c Cheng (2009)
  2. ^ Ming Sing, Hong Kong’s Democrats Hold Their Own Journal of Democracy Volume 20, Number 1, January 2009 ISSN: 1045-5736 DOI: 10.1353/jod.0.0046
  3. ^ a b Chan, Ming K. [1997] (1997). The Challenge of Hong Kong's Reintegration With China. Hong Kong University Press. Hong Kong (China). ISBN 9622094414.
  4. ^ News.gov.hk. "News.gov.hk." Dialogue, consensus, key to reform. Article 19 May 2004. Retrieved on 8 January 2008.
  5. ^ Kootnikoff, David (21 June 2005), Hong Kong Chief Faces Crisis of Legitimacy, Ohmynews
  6. ^ Yau, Cannix & Ng, Michael (16 December 2004) "Push to change democracy timetable 'a waste of time'". The Standard
  7. ^ Decision Of The Standing Committee Of The National People's Congress On Issues Relating To The Methods For Selecting The Chief Executive Of The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region And For Forming The Legislative Council Of The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region In The Year 2012 And On Issues Relating To Universal Suffrage (Adopted By The Standing Committee Of The Tenth National People's Congress At Its Thirty-First Session On 29 December 2007), Hong Kong Legal Information Institute
  8. ^ a b c "Hong Kong on the march - again. Asia Times, 11 Jan 2008, Retrieved on 14 January 2008.
  9. ^ Public Consultation on the Methods for Selecting the Chief Executive and for Forming the Legislative Council in 2012 Government of Hong Kong, 18 November 2009
  10. ^ Qiao Xiaoyang (15 April 2010). Door to universal suffrage is open, The Standard
  11. ^ "Familiar lines drawn over package". =The Standard. 18 November 2009. Retrieved 20 February 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)
  12. ^ Scarlett Chiang (21 December 2009). "Debate rages at prospect of `one man, two votes'". The Standard. Retrieved 20 February 2010.
  13. ^ a b Sina.com. "Sina.com." 五區公投號召全民起義. Retrieved on 2010-01-24.
  14. ^ a b Chiang, Scarlett (22 January 2010). "Eu denies polls independence ploy". The Standard. Retrieved 23 February 2010.
  15. ^ Hong Kong MPs quit in attempt to push Beijing towards direct elections The Guardian, 26 January 2010
  16. ^ Lee, Diana, (15 April 2010). 'Grab this golden chance', The Standard
  17. ^ Lee, Colleen (15 April 2010) Qiao adds clout to reforms, The Standard
  18. ^ a b Lee, Colleen (19 April 2012). Poll plan a big step forward, insists Lam, The Standard
  19. ^ Lee, Colleen (15 April 2010) Pan-democrats set to vote down package, The Standard
  20. ^ Wong, Albert (26 April 2010). "Pan-democrat alliance indicates it will reject political reform package", South China Morning Post
  21. ^ Chiang, Scarlett (26 April 2010). "Vow to sink early move on reform plan". The Standard. Retrieved 26 April 2010.
  22. ^ Wong Albert & Cheung, Simpson (3 May 2010) "Marchers call for more progressive reforms", South China Morning Post
  23. ^ Moy, Patsy (30 April 2010). Quit threat over key reform vote, The Standard
  24. ^ Ng, Michael (30 November 2004). Votes of pro-Beijing parties dash the slim referendum hopes of democrats
  25. ^ ""Activists receive community service for assaulting policeman." South China Morning Post. Retrieved on 18 January 2009.
  26. ^ "HK has historical responsibility to implement political reform: Lam.", South China Morning Post, Retrieved on 1 January 2008.
  27. ^ "Pan-democrats keep up momentum for 2012.", South China Morning Post, Retrieved on 13 January 2008.
  28. ^ Scmp. "Scmp." Tsang's 2020 vision. Retrieved on 1 January 2008.
  29. ^ HK government. "Government's response to LSD parade.", HK government, Retrieved on 5 January 2009.
  30. ^ Wenweipo.com. "Pdf.wenweipo.com." 憲法專家僅收少於百元. Retrieved on 2010-01-20.
  31. ^ "Debate rages at prospect of one man, two votes.." The Standard, Retrieved on 10 January 2010.
  32. ^ Msnbc.com. "Hong Kong marchers call for Democracy Now! Retrieved on 2010-01-02.

External links

  • Door to universal suffrage is open, The Standard (15 April 2010) - English translation of speech given by Qiao Xiaoyang, head of the NPC's Hong Kong Basic Law committee, in Beijing on 15 April 2010.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Democracy_in_Hong_Kong&oldid=359790893"