Occupy Central
Occupy Central is a civil disobedience movement which began in Hong Kong on September 28, 2014. It calls on thousands of protesters to block roads and paralyse Hong Kong's financial district if the Beijing and Hong Kong governments do not agree to implement universal suffrage for the chief executive election in 2017 and the Legislative Council elections in 2020 according to "international standards." The movement was initiated by Benny Tai Yiu-ting (戴耀廷), an associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, in January 2013.
Umbrella Movement
The Umbrella Movement (Chinese: 雨傘運動; pinyin: yǔsǎn yùndòng) is a loose political movement that was created spontaneously during the Hong Kong protests of 2014. Its name derives from the recognition of the umbrella as a symbol of defiance and resistance against the Hong Kong government, and the united grass-roots objection to the decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) of 31 August.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
POST OCCUPY CENTRAL - DAY 129:
Full coverage of the day’s events on 23-04
Can we achieve democracy by vetoing the government's plan?
THE GOVERNMENT has unveiled its proposal for the election of the Chief Executive (CE) by universal suffrage in 2017. However, pan-democratic legislators have remained resolute in their decision to veto the plan. If things remain as they are, the proposal will in all probability be thrown out by the Legislative Council, and Hong Kong's political system will remain unchanged.
Though the constitutional reform package is based on the August 31 framework, it is evident that the best efforts have been made to make the 2017 CE election more democratic and transparent. For one thing, the nomination threshold is so low as to allow five to ten candidates. Furthermore, the final candidates will be chosen by secret ballot by members of the nominating committee. To a certain extent, this will make it harder for anyone to manipulate the nominating committee. Though pan-democratic legislators have treated these arrangements with contempt, they are the fruit of the efforts made to achieve the most within the confines of the August 31 framework. The constitutional reform trio definitely deserve praise if it is them who have done such hard work.
The Beijing authorities, who look at the CE election from the standpoint of national security, will never allow those who oppose them to be elected CE. The composition and operation of the nominating committee mean that, as a screening mechanism, it will prevent those who the Beijing authorities do not trust from getting elected. But the pan-democrats have been paying no regard for Beijing's concerns for national security. As both sides have not engaged in in-depth discussion of the matter, their differences cannot be resolved easily. Things have so developed that it is now very difficult to reconcile their differences. During the drafting of the Basic Law, there was as much disagreement between the different sides as there is today. But those people never stopped looking for a solution. In contrast, this round of constitutional reform has been plagued by disagreements from the very beginning. The differences remain substantial, as no efforts have ever been made to resolve them. This shows that neither the Beijing authorities nor Hong Kong's opposition camp are capable of solving problems.
A constitutional reform package was thrown out by the Legislative Council in 2005. In 2010, when the issue was under discussion again, the Beijing authorities, adhering to the principle that constitutional reform should be conducted in a gradual and orderly manner, basically recycled the 2005 reform package. Had they not accepted the "super District Council seats" proposal at the eleventh hour, the proposal would have been thrown out as well. Now let us assume that this government's reform package is vetoed. What can we do if the five-step procedure to reform the political system is restarted but the Beijing government recycles the August 31 resolution? Furthermore, if the CE is not elected by universal suffrage in 2017, Legislative Council members will not be returned in this fashion in 2020 either. If democratic progress is our goal, can we solve the problem by vetoing the constitutional reform package? The answer is a definite no.
No one will emerge as the winner if this round of constitutional reform falls through. Hong Kong is a highly civilised society, and there is no reason why we should let something happen that will make everyone lose. It is still our hope that the Beijing authorities and the opposition camp in Hong Kong will be able to solve the problems, engage in concrete discussion and seek a compromise so that the CE will be elected by universal suffrage in 2017. Otherwise Hong Kong will fall into decline and everyone will lose.
政改方案未搭下台階 2017普選特首難樂觀
政府公布2017年特首普選方案，泛民議員的回應是堅持否決；若停留在這種狀態，則方案夠票通過的可能性極低，政改將原地踏步。
政府提出的方案是按8．31決定框架設計，從建議內容看來是在框架的局限之下，盡量增加民主成分和透明度；例如低入閘門檻，容納最少5名和最多10名參選人。另外，提名委員以不記名方式，逐一表決參選人成為候選人的操作，一定程度上可以減低操控提委會的機會。這些在8．31框架局限下鑽營出來的空間，雖然泛民議員不屑一顧，但是若此乃政改三人組爭取的結果，則他們的努力仍然值得肯定。
北京從國家安全的角度體待特首人選，不容許與中央對抗的人出任特首；提委會的組成與運作，實質上就是篩選機制，使北京不放心的人無緣當選特首。泛民議員就國家安全問題，罔顧北京的憂慮，缺乏深入討論之下，使北京與泛民的困結難解。事態到了這個階段，已經很難看到調和空間。當年草擬《基本法》，各方對具體議題的分歧與今次政改爭拗不遑多讓，不過當時即使再爭再吵，大家仍然尋求辦法解決，今次政改的爭拗從一開始就未稍為遏止，分歧也未收窄過。事實上，各方從未嘗試縮窄分歧，反映出北京和本港反對陣營在香港政制問題上，都缺失解決問題的能力。
2005年，立法會曾經否決過政改方案；2010年再提政改時，北京堅持循序漸進原則，基本上把2005年的方案再拿出來，最後關頭接受「超級區議會」議席而通過了方案。倘若今次否決了政改方案，日後即使重啟五部曲，北京再拿出8．31決定，大家又可以怎樣？還有是2017年沒有了特首普選，2020年的立法會普選也不會實現，從推進民主進程的角度來看，否決政改方案就可以解決問題嗎？答案顯然不是。
若今次政改失敗，那就沒有贏家，大家都是輸家。然而，香港是高度文明的社會，無理由明知道大家都輸的事，卻讓它發生。所以，我們仍然期望，北京與本港反對陣營重拾解決問題的能力，透過實質商討，尋求妥協，落實2017年特首普選，扭轉「統統皆輸」局面，把香港從由盛轉衰的分水嶺拉回來。
沒有留言:
張貼留言