Foreword | Contents | Chapter 2
1.
The Hong Kong Experiment:
"One Country , Two Systems"
The Context: The Sino-British Joint Declaration
For long centuries, Hong Kong was a part of China. But as a result of
the infamous Opium Wars, the island of Hong Kong was ceded to Britain in 1842, and the
southern part of the Kowloon Peninsula, together with Stonecutters Island, in 1860.
Subsequently, New Kowloon (North of Boundary Street), the New Territories, and about 250
outlying islands, which form 92% of the land area of the existing colony, were leased to
Britain in 1898 for 99 years. Over the past century, few challenged the legitimacy of
these so-called unequal treaty arrangements.
In 1972, when the People's Republic of China was admitted to the United
Nations, China indicated the she would not recognize the legality of the British Crown
colony of Hong Kong. In 1979, Deng Xiaoping reportedly told Sir Murray Maclehose, the then
governor of Hong Kong, that China would take back Hong Kong no later than 1997. In
September 1982, when Mr. Margaret Thatcher, the British Prime Minister, visited Beijing,
she was told that China would resume its sovereignty over Hong Kong on July 1, 1997. Soon
after, the British and the Chinese governments entered into negotiations which lasted for
two solid years. The end product was an agreement in the form of a Joint Declaration,
outlining the basic policies regarding the way the Chinese government will exercise
sovereignty over Hong Kong after July 1, 1997. Here are the most essential aspects:
Hong Kong is to become a Special Administrative Region of China;
China, using the "One Country, Two Systems" principle, will
allow Hong Kong to enjoy a high degree of autonomy, except in the matters of defense and
foreign affairs;
The socialist system shall not be practiced in Hong Kong and the
existing capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for fifty years;
The Chief Executive shall be selected from amongst Hong Kong citizens
by election or through consultations and shall be accountable to the legislature;
The legislature shall be constituted by elections (again, only Hong
Kong Citizens will be elected, thus fulfilling the "Hong Kong people ruling Hong
Kong" Principle); and,
The existing judicial system in Hong Kong shall remain unchanged,
with the power of final adjudication added to it.
The Problem: A Crisis of Confidence
Immediately after the initialing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration
in September 1984, the Hong Kong government set up an assessment office to monitor
citizens' acceptance of it. It was revealed that 81% of the citizens in Hong Kong thought
the Joint Declaration was acceptable. Many even went so far as to think that it was a good
agreement. On the whole, people at that time believed that after 1997, all the ingredients
which make Hong Kong successful would be kept and Hong Kong citizens would enjoy
self-government. But this rosy picture changed rapidly and dramatically. According to one
opinion poll in July 1987, only 28% of local citizens thought that they could accept the
Joint Declaration. One month later, according to another opinion poll, only 21% thought
so.
Hong Kong citizens are definitely suffering from a confidence crisis.
Recent immigration figures underscore this fact. Hong Kong citizens, particularly those
with considerable resources (in terms of skills and money), are leaving in thousands.
According to the figures released by the Immigration Department: in 1987, 29,998 Hong Kong
citizens emigrated (mostly to North America and Australia); in 1988, the figure was
45,817. It is not far-fetched to put the 1989 estimate at 50,000!
What has caused this crisis of confidence in Hong Kong?
The major factor has to do with China. In 1984, China showed signs of
liberalizing. What went on in China generated some faith amongst Hong Kong citizens
towards China. During that period, China also made many promises to the people of Hong
Kong. But soon, China changed. The downfall of Hu Yao Bang in January 1987 sent shivers
down the spines of Hong Kong people. It was a sign that conservative elements were once
more taking hold of China. People began to doubt whether all the promises could ever be
fulfilled. Worse still, what gone on recently in China has strongly reminded the people in
Hong Kong about China's poor record regarding respect for human rights. After all, about
half of the people in Hong Kong originally came from China. Many have had first hand
knowledge or even dreadful personal experiences during the various political movements in
China since the 1950s. especially the notorious cultural revolution.
In addition, China on the whole has failed to read the Hong Kong
situation. The Chinese leadership is too eager to listen to the opinions of the big
businessmen. The wealthy represent only a very small segment of the community in Hong
Kong. They may not know the so-called realities in Hong Kong. Furthermore, they are too
eager to say things to please the Chinese leaders. So the picture formed in the minds of
the Chinese leaders is that in order to maintain stability and prosperity, their foremost
consideration is to put the investors hearts at rest!
Citizens in Hong Kong, by and large, are very afraid of intervention by
China. In November 1985, Xu Jiatun, head of the New China News Agency in Hong Kong, gave a
press conference during which he accused Britain of trying to introduce political reforms
in Hong Kong. Since then many top-ranking Chinese officials have given the same kind of
warning. It was to nobody's surprise that there were no direct elections to the
legislature in Hong Kong in 1988 on account of China's adamant objections. The view of
China has become crystal clear in the drafting of the Basic Law. The drafters, consisting
of 33 mainlanders and 23 Hong Kong Chinese, all appointed by China, have drawn up
proposals for the future S.A.R. government. On the whole, these proposals were so
conservative that if passed, Hong Kong people will never have a fully elected legislature
and will never be able to elect their own Chief Executive.
Hong Kong citizens' confidence plummeted further when China went ahead
with the construction of a nuclear power plant at Daya Bay, just 40 kilometers to the
northeast of Kowloon, despite more than 1.1 million people expressing their objection
through a two-week signature campaign in August 1987.
The Demands
1. Democracy Before 1997
If the Hong Kong Experiment is going to work, full democracy must be
established in Hong Kong on or before 1997.
Hong Kong is a British Crown colony. The British government sends a
senior official to govern Hong Kong. The governor of Hong Kong has immense power. He
handpicks his chief advisors to form the Executive Council which deals with all important
policy matters. The majority of members of the law-making body, the Legislative Council,
are also appointed. A minority of seats in this chamber have been indirectly elected since
1985. Though not elected by citizens, the Hong Kong government often claims that it
regularly consults citizens. But for those who know Hong Kong well, we know that the
consultation processes are often mere "window-dressing". The government cannot
accommodate views which are contrary to its own. Oftentimes, it listens to the views of
the big businessmen and the successful professionals. So "rule by the elite" is
the order of the day in Hong Kong. Ordinary citizens have no role at all to play in their
own government.
It has often been said also that even though there is no democracy in
Hong Kong, its citizens enjoy an impartial rule of law and a broad scope of individual
freedom (at least by Asian standards). The Hong Kong government is accountable to the
British government which is one of the oldest democracies in the world.
But in 1997, this picture will be changed radically. China will take
the place of Britain as the sovereign state. According to the 1984 Sino-British Joint
Declaration and the subsequent promises made by the most senior Chinese leaders, the
future government will be sent neither from Britain nor from China. It will be rooted in
Hong Kong. Hence, democracy in Hong Kong is the most obvious solution.
What should democracy look like in Hong Kong?
First, all efforts must be made to foster an open and free atmosphere
in Hong Kong whereby all citizens can express themselves freely and enjoy life.
Second, all citizens in Hong Kong must have the right to elect their
Chief Executive and all the legislators. The Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary
should have a "balance of power". A fully democratic government in Hong Kong
will greatly enhance the confidence of the people in Hong Kong because it can give more
adequate protection of human rights and it will be more likely to respond to the needs and
wishes of the citizens. Furthermore, only a government for the citizens and by the
citizens can generate a keener sense of identity and belonging amongst citizens on which,
in the long run, the development of Hong Kong largely depends.
All signs show that so far, China is very reluctant to give Hong Kong a
democratic government, at least not before 2012. (This is stipulated in the draft Basic
Law.) By and large, China has taken a pretty lenient attitude towards Hong Kong's social
and economic affairs; but it is most stringent on the future political structure in Hong
Kong. Presumably, China wants to maintain "stability and prosperity" in Hong
Kong at all costs; hence, the less change the better. China believes that to have a
democratic government introduced to Hong Kong at this time will be too radical a change.
Things may easily get out of China's hands. Ultimately, China wants to maintain the final
control over Hong Kong.
What China fails to grasp is that 98% of the people in Hong Kong are
Chinese. A great majority are very happy to see Hong Kong being returned to China in 1997.
(At least 80% of people in 1984 thought so according to the Hong Kong government
assessment report in October that year.) Some citizens in Hong Kong may have misgivings
about communism and the Chinese government. But citizens in Hong Kong can never pose any
serious threat to the overthrow of the Chinese government. If they criticize, it is
because they love China and wish to contribute to China's ambitious economic reforms and
modernization programmes. The "One Country" do not pose any problem for Hong
Kong Chinese. However, what they are insistent upon is the "Two Systems". Hong
Kong citizens feel that in order to continue the so-called economic miracle in Hong Kong,
China should not interfere unnecessarily. The "Two Systems" concept, if fully
implemented, will allow Hong Kong to be insulated from China. This is a principal reason
why Hong Kong should have a fully democratic government introduced as early as possible.
China should understand the psychology of the Hong Kong citizens.
Moreover, the success of the Hong Kong Experiment will benefit China immensely. Therefore,
China must adopt a "let go, let live" attitude and a much more liberal policy
towards Hong Kong.
2. A Fire Exit
Generally, citizens in Hong Kong are afraid to face the future because
if something should go wrong after 1997, they have nowhere else to go, no escape route, so
to speak. I believe that Britain has a responsibility towards the 3.25 million Hong Kong
citizens who were born in its territory. Therefore, Britain should reconsider how to grant
these "British subjects" British passports.
Since the early 1960s, Britain has denied Hong Kong citizens the right
of abode in the United Kingdom. In 1981, Britain has passed the Nationality Act,
arbitrarily giving Hong Kong citizens born in Hong Kong a new status - British Dependent
Territory Citizen. Since then, Hong Kong citizens were not only deprived of the right of
abode in the United Kingdom, but were also not allowed to enter the United Kingdom as they
wish. In 1986, Britain passed the Hong Kong (British Nationality) Order which created the
status of British National (Overseas) for Hong Kong British nationals who wish to retain
British nationality after 1997. All these actions were very unusual. Step by step, the
3.25 million British nationals in Hong Kong have been deprived of a genuine nationality.
They are neither British nor Chinese. This is not in accordance with the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly in
1948 (Article 15: "Everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be
arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his
nationality.") What is even more sad is that all this was done without any prior
consultation. Most Hong Kong citizens have not even heard about this and all its
implications.
They were hurt because they felt they were abandoned, especially when
they compare themselves with their counterparts in Macau who will all be issued with
E.E.C. passports by Portugal. Thus, Macanese Portuguese nationals will have the right of
abode in any E.E.C. country, even the United Kingdom, after Macau is returned to China in
1999.
It should be emphasized here that very few Hong Kong citizens would
want to emigrate to the United Kingdom. But if they are given a "fire exit", I
am sure many will decide to stay and work in Hong Kong. This would help to ease the
"brain drain".
Britain added fuel to the confidence crisis in Hong Kong in other ways.
It did not prevent two of the biggest firms in Hong Kong with British interests from
leaving. (Jardine Mattheson moved their registered head office to Bermuda in 1984, and
they have been followed by Hong Kong Land in March this year.) In almost every important
issue affecting the future of Hong Kong, Britain has yielded to Chinese pressure and given
in. These have included the 1988 Direct Elections issue and the drafting of the Basic Law.
It is widely believed that all Britain cares for now is to keep up the
good relationship with China. Understandably, the British government will comply with the
wishes of the Chinese government over the way Hong Kong's future should be developed. As a
matter of fact, a great many members of parliament in Britain assumed that with the
ratification of the Joint Declaration in May 1985, the Hong Kong problem was thereby
solved. This kind of attitude is definitely not helpful to the Hong Kong government as it
needs all the support it can get from Britain at this crucial period of time.
The British and Hong Kong governments should now be working together
even more. They should stand on the side of the people of Hong Kong and protect their
interests. What is going on in China regarding Hong Kong is not just a matter of internal
affairs. The British government has a responsibility to see that the future of Hong Kong
should be developed according to the terms laid down in the Joint Declaration signed by
both China and Britain. Both the British and Hong Kong governments now have the awesome
task of reflecting to the Chinese authorities the real situation in Hong Kong, including
its citizens' hopes and fears. They must all realize that a fully democratic and
representative government must be developed in Hong Kong at a faster speed. In a personal
letter to this author, the Rt. Hon. Edward Heath, a former conservative Prime Minister,
said it well, "A proportion of directly elected seats in the Legislative Council
should be introduced sooner rather than later if Hong Kong is to have an experienced
representative legislature by 1997."
3. Citizens' Voice and Participation
In order to make the Hong Kong Experiment work, citizens in Hong Kong
must play a more active role. They must stand up to fight for what is best for them and
for Hong Kong. Hong Kong people must understand that it is not out of bounds to fight for
a fairer share for the future of Hong Kong, the land where their future generations will
be born and live.
It has often been said that most of the people in Hong Kong are very
passive. They grew up in a colony where there was no civic education. They were taught to
take whatever was given. 98% of them are Chinese. Traditionally, Chinese were only
concerned with their family and their clan. They would stay away from social involvement,
especially anything that has to do with the government.
However, beginning in the early 1980s, more and more young
intellectuals and professionals came to realize that what Hong Kong needs is democracy.
They realized, as Professor Fan Lishi said, "democracy is never granted." So
they got together and formed several political groups. However, the authorities seldom
took heed of their reasoning and their demands. This did not only discourage those who
were actively involved, but also those who were watching. A sense of uselessness and
helplessness soon developed. This helps to explain why in the March Urban Council and
Regional Council elections, only 17% of the registered voters cared to cast their votes
(the lowest in Hong Kong's history).
What are the wishes of the Hong Kong citizens? For most, they want to
get on with their daily lives without any interference. Freedom is what they want. Only an
open and democratic government can safeguard this.
Citizens of Hong Kong, on the whole, want to see China become more
stable and prosperous. Although many do not have confidence in the Chinese government,
they still want to contribute whatever they can to China. This is inborn patriotism.
How does the servant community called the church fare in all this?
In the 1950s, because of the influx of refugees from China, there were
many felt needs. On the whole, the church in Hong Kong did well in responding to these
needs, first with welfare and relief and then later with medical and health care,
education and social work. About 20% of hospital beds, 40% of school places and more that
60% of social welfare work are currently provided by churches or church organizations. As
time has passed, the institutional church has become very stagnant because it has to run a
big enterprise and therefore has little or no time to study and think. Also, the church
has to increasingly rely on government funding and contributions from the wealthy for its
work, with the effect that it has become a part of the establishment. A senior journalist,
Emily Lau, dubbed the relationship between the church leaders and the big businessmen as
an "unholy alliance".
Like the wider community, Christians are also suffering from a
confidence crisis. Fifteen out of thirty choir members of one of the biggest churches in
Hong Kong have recently emigrated. Half of the department heads of two well-known
Christian institutions have gone. One denomination with strong American ties has set up a
fund to enable its pastors to emigrate to North America.
It is precisely at this time that Hong Kong needs the church; probably
much more than at any other time in its entire history. The church needs to reexamine its
faith in God and rededicate itself to lead and to serve the many flocks in Hong Kong
without shepherds. The church in Hong Kong must play the role of a comforter, giving the
citizens of Hong Kong strength and hope to live by. It must also be a catalyst,
encouraging Hong Kong citizens to give voice to their opinions and to become actively
involved in Hong Kong's public affairs. In order to do so, the church must lead the way
and speak up from time to time on issues which may affect the livelihood of the masses. No
government (at least not in Asia) encourages opposition. Can the church play the role of
the loyal opposition and criticize the government when its decisions and policies are not
in the best interests of the entire community?
The authorities, for sure, are not keen to cultivate a political
leadership which is independent in its thinking (i.e. which does not toe the official
line). They are not eager to promote political education. (Hong Kong prohibits political
education in schools.) In other words, they are not in a rush to have
"democracy" introduced in Hong Kong.
If the Hong Kong Experiment is to work, these are the essential
ingredients: an early introduction of a fully representative and democratic government;
intense nurturing of political leadership and a full-scale push on political or democratic
education for all citizens, especially students and young people. The church can play a
key role in all these areas.
Recently, two major opinions have emerged. One has been formed by the
wealthy business people and professionals. They advocate the least change possible. They
want to maintain the "status quo" because this is to their advantage. (Right now
they are enjoying immense power and privileges.) The other has been formed by young
intellectuals and professionals who have more contact with the grassroots. They insist
that democracy is the best solution for Hong Kong's future. The former has the backing of
China. The latter is on the side of the masses. In this tug- of-war, the church is of some
importance. If the church follows the teaching in the Bible, it has no choice but to throw
its weight behind the efforts to promote a democratic government. In the end, whether the
Hong Kong Experiment will work or not depends on whether the social environment in Hong
Kong will entice the citizens to stay, to live happily and work meaningfully.
4. Support of the International Community
Hong Kong, "Borrowed Time, Borrowed Place" as it has been
called by the famous author Richard Hughes, has been trying to find its place in the
international scene. It is now an international city. It has become one of the most
important financial centers in the world. It has the world's busiest container port and
its total exports rank thirteenth in the world. Hong Kong has been able to achieve all
this in a relatively short period of time because it has had strong support from the
international community. Now, as it is going into the "One Country, Two Systems"
Experiment, it requires even more support and understanding from the international
community.
When the Joint Declaration was signed in September 1984, it received a
great deal of attention. Many people hailed it as a peaceful means to resolve
international disputes. A few even thought that it was a novel and valuable experiment. It
has a lot of bearing on the unification of Taiwan with the mainland. Some even went on to
say that it may show a way for the reunification of Korea and of Germany.
In order to maintain Hong Kong as an international city, free trade and
travel are of vital importance. Even after 1997, Hong Kong is promised an independent
status in trade negotiations. Since 1985, more and more countries have promised to
recognize Hong Kong citizens' "British National - Overseas" passports after
1997.
But in order to keep Hong Kong as a thriving international city, basic
human rights for all citizens as stated in the international covenant on civil and
political rights and the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights,
must be guaranteed.
The almost six million people now living in Hong Kong deserve more
freedom and political space. Increasingly, there are democratic aspirations calling for
adequate measures to safeguard basic human rights in Hong Kong in the future. The
international community should understand that these are genuine quests. They are not
synonymous with anti-China sentiments. The international community's concern for human
rights in Hong Kong and in China is certainly not meddling in China's internal affairs.
Especially from the Christian point of view, every human being deserves the right to live
freely and meaningfully and without unnecessary restrictions. This is because these rights
are God-given. Governments exist to serve their citizens and protect all their inherent
rights.
Conclusion
To conclude, the "One Country, Two Systems" Experiment is
basically a very difficult task - to put a capitalist region under communist state. If it
works, it will not only benefit Hong Kong but also China, and perhaps the rest of the
world. In order to make it work, there must be sufficient insulating devices for Hong Kong
and democracy must be introduced to Hong Kong as soon as possible. China and Britain must
trust one another and work hard together on these crucial points. Hong Kong citizens
should not be afraid to speak their minds. The international community should give its
full support to Hong Kong and be friends to Hong Kong citizens as they try to work out
what it best for their future. The Hong Kong church of course can help in this process and
try its best to enable all this to happen.
[Note: Presented at the CCA Workshop on the Church's Participation
in Political Reforms in Asia in Bangkok on October 27, 1988 and after slight revision at
the National Council of Churches of Christ, U.S.A. in New York on May 22, 1989.]
Foreword | Contents |
Chapter 2
Home | DAGA Press |