Political Decay in Hong Kong After the Occupy Central Movement

Abstract

This article examines the political crises of Hong Kong after the mass sit-in of the Occupy Central Movement. Lasted for 79 days, the mass-in of the Movement was organized to force the governments of China and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to adopt a genuine democratic process for electing the chief executive of Hong Kong in year 2017. The end of the Occupy Central Movement mass sit-in did not solve the disagreements between the government and the supporters from the pan-democratic camp on the issue of democratization. Hong Kong is suffering a certain degree of political decay with declining political strength in consolidating a democratic model, maintaining legitimacy, running an effective government, cementing social cohesion, and preserving high degree of autonomy. Consequently, the political capability of Hong Kong government to govern is weakening and its political strength is deteriorating.

Keywords:

• democracy
• governance
• legitimacy crisis
• Occupy Central Movement

Notes

¹Staff Reporters, “Orderly End to 75 Days of Turmoil,” South China Morning Post, December 12, 2014.

²HKSAR Government, The Third Report of the Constitutional Development Task Force, May 2004, 5–6.

³HKSAR Government, Consultation Document: Methods for Selecting the Chief Executive and for Forming the Legislative Council in 2012, November 2009, 42.

⁴Joshua But, “Pan-Democrats Unite for 2017 Vote,” South China Morning Post, March 22, 2013.

⁵Ibid.

⁶Joshua But & Gary Cheung, “Academic's Road Map to Democracy,” South China Morning Post, March 28, 2013.

⁷Joshua But & Collen Lee, “Opponents of Beijing Ineligible to be C.E.,” South China Morning Post, March 25, 2013.

⁸Ibid.

⁹Tai made a speech in a public forum on Occupy Central movement. See Staff Reporters, “2017 Chief Executive Election,” Ming Pao, April 15, 2013.

¹⁰Chan Kin-man, “The Meanings of Political Reform Cliff and Peaceful Occupy Central,” Ming Pao, May 13, 2013.

¹¹Joshua But, “Democracy Veteran: We'll Never Give Up,” South China Morning Post, April 15, 2013.

¹²Tony Cheung, Jeffie Lam, Gary Cheung, and Joyce Ng, “Pan-Dems' Proposal Wins Vote on Reform,” South China Morning Post, June 30, 2014.

¹³Ibid.

¹⁴Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government, Consultation Document: 2017 Seize the Opportunity, January 2015.

¹⁵Jeffie Lam, “Occupy Cooks Up Banque Action Plan,” South China Morning Post, September 12, 2014.

¹⁶Staff Reporters, “Occupy Central will Start Now,” Sunday Morning Post, September 28, 2014.

¹⁷Staff Reporters, “Students, Officials Still Far Apart,” South China Morning Post, October 22, 2014.

¹⁸Kang Ng, “No Joy for Carrie Lam as Pan-dems Dig Heels in,” South China Morning Post, January 20, 2015.

¹⁹Ngok Ma, “Democratic Development in Hong Kong: A Decade of Lost Opportunities,” The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in its First Decade, ed. Joseph Cheng (Hong Kong, City University of Hong Kong Press, 2007), 146–147.

²⁰Tony Cheung, Peter So, and Joyce Ng, “Tung and the Public are Polls Apart over C.Y.,” South China Morning Post, January 21, 2015.

²¹Staff Reporters, “Leung Popularity Increasing,” Ming Pao, November 28, 2014.

²²Kang Ng, “CY's Popularity Hits Record Low in Poll,” South China Morning Post, October 28, 2014.

²³Staff Reporters, “Protesters Focus on 2017 in Biggest March for Decade,” South China Morning Post, July 2, 2014.

²⁴Staff Reporters, “Masses on the March,” South China Morning Post, July 2, 2014.

²⁵Tony Cheung and Gary Cheung, “CY's Report Card Criticized for Hiding Evils,” South China Morning Post, June 25, 2014.

²⁶Kang Ng, “CY's Popularity Hits Record Low in Poll,” South China Morning Post, October 28, 2014.

²⁷Samuel Chan and Joyce Ng, “CY in the Dark over Probe into Australian Contract,” South China Morning Post, October 10, 2014.

²⁸Tony Chung, Gary Cheung, and Lauren Ho, “CY Impeachment Bid Voted Down,” South China Morning Post, January 10, 2013.

²⁹Anthony Cheung, “The Changing Political System: Executive-led or Disabled Governance,” The First Tung Chee-hwa Administration, ed. Siu-kai Lau (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 2002), 63–64.

³⁰Peter So and Fanny Fung, “CY Slams Pan-Democrats over IT Funding Filibuster,” South China Morning Post, February 4, 2015.

³¹Hok-ming Kong, “Chan: Stop Filibustering,” Ta Kung Pao, January 29, 2015.

³²Kang Ng, “Filibustering could Hurt the Economy,” South China Morning Post, November 24, 2014.

³³Margaret Ng, “Participation in the Legislative Council—Changes and Challenges,” New Trends of Political Participation in Hong Kong, ed. Joseph Cheng (Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press, 2014), 137.

³⁴Samuel Chan and Phila Siu, “James Tien Hits Out at Leung Again,” South China Morning Post, November 17, 2014.

³⁵Tony Cheung, “Listen to All Lawmakers, Liberals Urge CY,” South China Morning Post, December 11, 2014.

³⁶Ibid.

³⁷Agence France-Presse, “CY Leung: Democracy would See Poorer People Dominate Hong Kong Vote,” South China Morning Post, October 21, 2014.

³⁸Staff Reporters, “Chan Hits Leung over Controversial Remarks,” Ming Pao, October 27, 2014.

³⁹Tony Cheung and Jeffie Lam, “CY's Relations with Legco at Critical Point,” South China Morning Post, May 23, 2014.

⁴⁰Joyce Ng and Tony Cheung, “Legco President Renews His Call for Exco Reform,” South China Morning Post, May 30, 2013.

⁴¹Niall Fraser, “Morale of Top Civil Servants in Decay,” South China Morning Post, January 29, 2015.

⁴²Hong Kong Government, 2017: Seize the Opportunity, January 2015, p.vi.

⁴³Tat-kin Chan, “Occupiers should Leave,” Ta Kung Pao, November 17, 2014.

⁴⁴Shirley Zhoa, “The Occupy Generation Gap,” South China Morning Post, November 17, 2014.

⁴⁵Gary Cheung, “General Gap and Battle Plan Divide Campaigners,” South China Morning Post, November 6, 2014.

⁴⁶Staff Reporters, “Almost Half of the Respondents Opposed NPC Decisions,” Ming Pao, September 28, 2014.

⁴⁷Jeffie Lam “City Still Split Over 2017 Plan: Poll,” South China Morning Post, February 9, 2015.

⁴⁸Ming Sing and Yuen-sum Tang, “Mobilization and Conflicts over Hong Kong's Democratic Reform,” in Contemporary Hong Kong Government and Politics, ed. Wai Lam, Percy Lui, and Wilson Wong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2012), 154.

⁴⁹Kin-chung Chan, “One Country, Two Systems,” Ta Kung Pao, February 5, 2015.

⁵⁰State Council, Government of the People's Republic of China, White Paper on “One Country, Two Systems” Policy in Hong Kong, June 2014.

⁵¹Tanna Chong and Tony Cheung, “Beijing's Role in HK Affairs is Normal,” South China Morning Post, March 13, 2014.

⁵²Benson Wong, “Manlandization versus Democratization,” in The 2004 Legislative Council Elections in Hong Kong, ed. Hsin-chee Kuan and Timothy Wong (Hong K.ong: Chinese University Press, 2006), 270–271.

⁵³Staff Reporters, “Occupy Central: A Colour Revolution,” Ta Kung Pao, October 16, 2014.

⁵⁴Tat-kin Chan, “Leung: No Occupation,” Ta Kung Pao, October 21, 2014.

⁵⁵Staff Reporters, “Xi: Political Reforms are not Revolution,” Ming Pao, October 31, 2014.

⁵⁶Joyce Ng and K.C. Ng, “Beijing Hints at Taking More Active Role in HK,” South China Morning Post, September 23, 2014.

⁵⁷Staff Reporters, “Public Opinions: Accepting the Reforms Less than Half,” Ming Pao, February 9, 2015.

⁵⁸Ming Sing, “Hong Kong at Crossroads: Public Pressure for Democratic Reform,” in Politics and Government in Hong Kong: Crisis under Chinese Sovereignty, ed. Ming Sing (London: Routledge, 2009).

⁵⁹Ngok Ma, Political Development in Hong Kong: State, Political Society, and Civil Society (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2007), 66–7.