|
Following is a question by Dr Hon Lam Tai-fai and a written reply by the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Mr Raymond Tam, in the Legislative Council today (June 25):
Question:
On the 10th of this month, the State Council published the White Paper on "The Practice of the 'One Country, Two Systems' Policy in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region" (White Paper). It is clearly stated in the White Paper that "the central government is sincerely in favour of moving Hong Kong's democratic governance forward" and this is the "solemn commitment of the central government", but "the system of universal suffrage for selecting the chief executive and forming the Legislative Council must serve the country's sovereignty, security and development interests" and "the chief executive to be elected by universal suffrage must be a person who loves the country and Hong Kong". On the other hand, initiators of the action to occupy the Central District (Occupy Central) scheduled the Popvote to be conducted on the 22nd of this month (622 Popvote), through which members of the public would choose a proposal for selecting the Chief Executive by universal suffrage in 2017, and Occupy Central will strive for the implementation of that proposal. Some members from the pan-democratic camp and initiators of Occupy Central have indicated that the White Paper was published to target at the 622 Popvote and the July 1 march this year. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) whether it has assessed the respective impacts of the entire event of the 622 Popvote and its voting results on advancing constitutional development; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(2) whether it has assessed the impact of the White Paper on the 622 Popvote; if it has, of the details; it not, the reasons for that;
(3) whether it has assessed how the Central Government look at the 622 Popvote; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(4) whether it has identified any foreign forces participating in the organisation of the 622 Popvote;
(5) whether it will make reference to the proposal scoring the highest number of votes in the 622 Popvote when consolidating the views collected from the public consultation exercise on constitutional development and drawing up constitutional development proposals;
(6) whether it has assessed if the results of the 622 Popvote will stimulate more people to participate in Occupy Central; if the assessment outcome is in the affirmative, of the details and the deployment to be made; if the assessment outcome is in the negative, the justifications for that;
(7) whether it has conducted any assessment on the accuracy of the 622 Popvote's voter turnout figures announced; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(8) whether it has received any complaint lodged by members of the public about the 622 Popvote; if it has, of the details;
(9) of the police manpower deployed for maintaining public order on the day the 622 Popvote was conducted;
(10) whether it has assessed if the organisation of the 622 Popvote has breached the law; if the assessment outcome is in the affirmative, of the legal provisions breached;
(11) whether the Government called on the public not to participate in the 622 Popvote; if it did, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;
(12) whether it will formulate policies or measures to prevent activities similar to the 622 Popvote from being conducted again in order to avoid any impact on the constitutional development; if it will, of the details;
(13) whether it will publicise the contents of the White Paper comprehensively to enable the public to judge if the White Paper is published to target at the 622 Popvote; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(14) whether it has assessed the impacts of the entire event of the 622 Popvote and its voting results on the July 1 march this year; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
In consultation with relevant bureaux, a consolidated reply to the questions raised by Dr the Hon Lam is as follows:
The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) is aware that a so-called "civil referendum" organised by some groups has started on June 20, 2014. On the same day of June 20, the Government issued a press release, stressing that "civil referendum" did not exist in the Basic Law and the legislation in the HKSAR, and hence such "voting" had no legal effect.
Regarding Dr Hon Lam's question on the deployment of police force, the Police in general do not disclose such information. The Police will make appropriate deployment according to the actual circumstances to ensure public order and public safety.
As regards the accuracy of the voter turnout figures of the "referendum", including whether or how participants' identities are verified, we consider that these are matters that should be explained by the organiser.
Since the establishment of the HKSAR, the political structure of Hong Kong has been developing, in the light of the actual situation in the HKSAR and in a gradual and orderly manner, towards the ultimate aim of universal suffrage in accordance with the Basic Law and the relevant Interpretation and Decisions of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC). Constitutional development is a matter for the HKSAR and it is entirely an internal affair of China. Foreign governments should respect this principle and should not interfere in any way. The HKSAR Government also reiterates this point during briefings on Government policies held with representatives of foreign governments. We also note that the spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has expressed the Central People's Government's position on June 19 that "China is consistent in its opposition to outside interference of any kind in Hong Kong's internal affairs."
The HKSAR Government reiterates that any proposal relating to the selection of the Chief Executive (CE) in 2017 and the forming of the Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2016 should be, legally, strictly in accordance with the Basic Law and relevant Interpretation and Decisions of the NPCSC; politically, the proposals should stand a reasonable chance of gaining support of the community and securing passage by a two-thirds majority of Members in the LegCo; and operationally, the proposals should be practical and practicable. Regarding the "civic nomination" proposal advocated by some groups and people, the HKSAR Government has repeatedly pointed out that according to Article 45 of the Basic Law, the power to nominate CE candidates is vested in the Nominating Committee (NC) only. We also note that there are many opinions in the community, including those from legal groups and personalities, that "civic nomination" will bypass or undermine the substantive powers of the NC to nominate candidates and hence is, legally, highly controversial. Politically, such a proposal will unlikely be conducive to forging consensus, and operationally, the feasibility of implementation is also questionable. The Chief Secretary for Administration has mentioned at a meeting with the media earlier on that it was impossible for the HKSAR Government to put forth a proposal that was not in conformity with the Basic Law and relevant Interpretation and Decisions of the NPCSC. At the same occasion, the Secretary for Justice also pointed out that an unlawful matter could not become lawful because of a large number of people "voting", or a large-scale political activity being initiated.
During the five-month consultation on constitutional development, the HKSAR Government has received different views from various organisations and individuals of the community. At present, we are consolidating and analysing the views received during the consultation period, as well as compiling the consultation report, with a view to assisting the CE to submit a report to the NPCSC to kick-start the "Five-step Process" of constitutional development. We will faithfully reflect the views received during the consultation period in the consultation report.
The HKSAR Government appeals to the community to forge consensus in a rational and pragmatic manner and on the basis of the Basic Law and relevant Interpretation and Decisions of the NPCSC; and in discussing specific proposals, pay due regard to the legal, political and actual operational aspects, with a view to successfully implementing universal suffrage for the CE election in 2017 as scheduled and in accordance with the law, so that over five million eligible voters could elect the next CE by "one person, one vote" in 2017.
After the Information Office of the State Council published the White Paper on "The Practice of the 'One Country, Two Systems' Policy in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region" (the White Paper) on June 10, the HKSAR Government issued a press release to encourage the public to read the White Paper in detail for a better understanding of the Basic Law and the practice of "One Country, Two Systems" in the HKSAR. At the same time, to facilitate public access to the content of the White Paper through different channels, the Government also uploaded the full text of the White Paper to the Government's e-bulletin, the Basic Law website and the website of the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau.
The HKSAR Government respects the freedom of speech, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration, etc. enjoyed by Hong Kong residents in accordance with the Basic Law. Meanwhile, Article 42 of the Basic Law clearly provides that "Hong Kong residents and other persons in Hong Kong shall have the obligation to abide by the laws in force in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region". The HKSAR Government stresses that in case of any contravention of the law and breach of public order, law enforcement agencies will handle such a situation strictly in accordance with the law to ensure that law and order and public peace are maintained in Hong Kong.
Ends/Wednesday, June 25, 2014
|
