POST REFORM VOTE：DAY 5 (23-06-2015)

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.

Occupy Central site in Causeway Bay was cleared as police moved in  ...

Occupy Central site in an area surrounding the Legislative Council and Central Government Offices at Tamar were cleared 22-06-2015.

Hong Kong reform vote

The Hong Kong government’s political reform proposal for how the city elects its leader by universal suffrage for the first time in 2017 is based on a strict framework set by Beijing. The plan limits the number of candidates to two or three and requires them to win majority support from a 1,200 strong nominating committee. Arguing that this does not constitute genuine universal suffrage, pan-democratic lawmakers have vowed to reject the package, while pro-democracy groups have protested. The government’s resolution was to be put to a vote by the 70-member Legislative Council in June 2015, requiring a two-thirds majority to be passed.

POST OCCUPY CENTRAL - DAY 189

POST REFORM VOTE：DAY 5

Full coverage of the day’s events on 23-06

Redrawing the political landscape


WITH the constitutional reform package voted down by the Legislative Council, the post-constitutional reform era has begun. Over the past two-odd years, society has been torn by bitter conflicts over the constitutional reform issue. In the days to come, can we re-imbue our political ecology and culture with sense and reason? How will the political landscape be redefined and redrawn? These are questions of concern to every sector of society. Ronny Tong Ka-wah's resignation from the Civic Party and the Legislative Council is probably a prelude to the restructuring of Hong Kong's political map in the post-constitutional reform era.

While they appeared united, Tong had for a long time been at variance with other members of the Civic Party. Five years ago, when the Civic Party joined forces with the League of Social Democrats to stage a de facto referendum by means of a five-constituency resignation, Tong took a stand different from his party's. And the recent constitutional reform issue saw the Civic Party choosing to take a confrontational approach, and Tong choosing to carry out a dialogue. Their policies and strategies were so different that, in their public statements, Tong and the leaders of the Civic Party did not even try to conceal their differences. As their political convictions are different, it is only natural for them to part company.

In recent years, in his political speeches, Tong has often expressed his desire to change Hong Kong's political culture. The political arena over the past few years has been dominated by extremism, leaving no room for rational discussion. When the constitutional reform controversy was at its height, some opposition members in their public statements went so far as to deny the constitutional roles, powers, and functions that the state, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, and the central government possess in relation to the Hong Kong SAR. What are their plans for Hong Kong? The opposition owes the public an answer to this question.
After the Legislative Council's rejection of the constitutional reform package, there are political parties in the pan-democratic camp that call for a dialogue with the central government. However, there are also those who do not seek to engage the central government in constructive talks. If in the days to come the opposition continues to pursue the policy of confrontation, while those in favour of a sensible dialogue fail to get sufficiently strong, not only will there be no progress in the democratisation process, but economic development and matters related to people's livelihood will suffer severely.

Tong established, before his resignation from the Civic Party, the Path of Democracy think tank, whose mission is to find a middle way between the two polarised political camps. As he said he is not retiring from politics, he is clearly trying to pursue his middle-of-the-road political principles. His resignation from the Civic Party may therefore be seen as a change in the line-up of the pan-democratic camp in the post-constitutional reform era.

In the district council election to be held in a few months and the Legislative Council election to be held next year, the emergence of new political groups running for office may change the political landscape. As Hong Kong is a highly developed economy, there should be a majority of rational moderates in society, and they should hold sway. Unfortunately, in the constitutional reform controversy just past, the moderates were almost completely marginalised. Should this be ascribed to some fixed factors, or to a society just temporarily thrown off its balance? No one can answer the question at present. We will have to wait and see.

政治版圖開始重組 期望理性生態重臨

隨着立法會否決政改方案，「後政改」時期於焉開始。過去兩年多，各方環繞政改激烈爭鬥、社會撕裂，未來一段日子，政治生態和文化能否回復文明理性，政治版圖將出現怎樣的切割和組合，都備受關注。湯家驊退出公民黨並辭去立法會議席，相信只是政局重組的其中一幕。

湯家驊與公民黨貌合神離，並非始於今日；5年前，公民黨與社民連聯手發動所謂「五區總辭，變相公投」，湯家驊的取態已經有別於公民黨。今次政改，公民黨選擇對抗，湯家驊選擇對話，路線與策略截然不同，其間公民黨領導層與湯家驊在公開發言時，言語間已經不掩飾分歧。政治理念不同，以分手收場，其實十分正常。

近年，湯家驊議政，常常提到希望改變香港的政治文化。事實上，近年政治氛圍激化，理性討論空間完全被堵塞。在政改爭拗最熱熾之時，反對陣營一些人的公開發言，連國家、人大常委會、中央政府在香港特區的憲制角色、地位與職能，都予否定，究竟要把香港推向一個怎樣的狀態，至今反對陣營中人仍未向市民解釋和交代。

否決政改之後，個別泛民黨派提出要與中央交流溝通的說法，但是反對陣營其他力量則仍然沒有尋求良性互動之意。未來一段日子，若反對陣營繼續奉行對抗路線，理性對話力量無法凝聚成一股夠分量的力量，則不僅民主進程無法寸進，其他經濟民生事務的推展也會困難重重。

湯家驊退黨之前已經另組智庫「民主思路」，要在目前政局兩極之間尋找第三條出路。湯家驊表示不會退出政壇，有理由相信他要實踐中間路線的政治理念，因此湯家驊退出公民黨，可解讀為民主黨派在「後政改」的政治板塊移動。

數月後舉行的區議會選舉和明年的立法會選舉，若有新興政治勢力加入競逐，政治版圖或許會出現不一樣局面。香港是經濟高度發展的社會，溫和理性中間力量理應是大多數，並成為主導力量。不過，今次政改的中間力量幾無立錐之地，這是特定條件的狀况，抑或社會短暫失衡的結果，目前無人可以給予答案，未來一段日子將見到苗頭。