香港特首選舉被中聯辦操控，完全是場鬧劇

葉劉淑儀競選辦總新聞主任：
香港特首選舉被中聯辦操控，完全是場鬧劇


曾參選本屆香港特首選舉的新民黨主席葉劉淑儀，其競選辦總新聞主任的彭仕敦（Mark Pinkstone）日前在英文媒體 HKFP 撰文，批評北京政府透過中聯辦操控今次特首選舉，不僅違反《基本法》第22條，也令香港人對「一國兩制」失去信心。

彭仕敦在文中指，北京政府早在去年年中已經「欽點」時任政務司司長林鄭月娥作為下任特首，其後中聯辦展開一系列「助選」工程；港府去年底突然公布的西九故宮項目是北京政府贈予林鄭月娥的「禮物」；中聯辦曾分別向另外兩位參選人曾俊華及葉劉淑儀承諾亞投行 CEO 和立法會主席的職位，以換取他們退選等等。

彭仕敦又在文章中提到，在選舉前幾乎每個週末，來自北京的官員都會與中聯辦官員及選委在深圳會面，就特首選舉交換看法。他又引用南華早報早前的報導，指身兼中央港澳工作協調小組組長的全國人大委員長張德江就曾與香港商界大亨、長和系主席李嘉誠及其兒子李澤鉅、李澤楷會面，並成功說服本來屬意曾俊華的三人轉而投票給林鄭月娥。

在本屆特首選舉中，葉劉淑儀因未能取得足夠的提名票，未能成為候選人。彭仕敦在文章認為，葉劉淑儀具有豐富的行政經驗、曾創建新民黨，又擁有完整政綱，是同屬建制派的林鄭月娥的最大威脅。他表示，中聯辦曾致電所有選委，要求對方提名林鄭月娥，而不要提名葉劉淑儀。

最近的特首選舉展現一個眾人皆知、但沒人公開說出來的事實——中聯辦完全控制了選舉……整場選舉完全是一場鬧劇。

文章發表後，彭仕敦在 Facebook 發布聲明，稱文章純屬個人意見，與競選辦無關，而葉劉淑儀亦對文章並不知情。葉劉淑儀則透過發言人稱，對事件「不予置評」。而中聯辦迄今沒有回應傳媒查詢。

曾表態支持葉劉淑儀參選特首，也曾表示接過「拉票電話」的新民黨副主席田北辰回應指，在這次特首選舉中，中央駐港機構不僅拉票，甚至硬性規定只能有一名建制派人士參選；他認為，這種拒絕自由競爭的做法不僅會加劇社會撕裂，也令新當選的特首有「先天缺陷」。

投票支持林鄭月娥的工聯會立法會議員黃國健則指，自己從來沒有收到過北京或中聯辦的「拉票電話」，認為彭仕敦的指控並無實質證據。他亦認為，中央對於香港特首人選具有話語權，就算北京官員與選委就候選人交換意見也「沒什麼大不了」。

777 票

3月26日，前政務司司長林鄭月娥以777票當選香港首名女特首。

《基本法》第22條
中央人民政府所屬各部門、各省、自治區、直轄市均不得干預香港特別行政區根據本法自行管理的事務。中央各部門、各省、自治區、直轄市如需在香港特別行政區設立機構，須徵得香港特別行政區政府同意並經中央人民政府批准。中央各部門、各省、自治區、直轄市在香港特別行政區設立的一切機構及其人員均須遵守香港特別行政區的法律。*中國其他地區的人進入香港特別行政區須辦理批准手續，其中進入香港特別行政區定居的人數由中央人民政府主管部門徵求香港特別行政區政府的意見後確定。香港特別行政區可在北京設立辦事機構。（資料來自基本法官方網站）

The role of Beijing’s ‘invisible hand’ in the chief executive elections

By Mark Pinkstone – Chief Information Officer for Regina Ip’s campaign

The recent chief executive (CE) election makes one commonly known, but not spoken about, point: It is all controlled by the Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government.

The whole election protocol is a farce. Half way through 2016, the Central People’s Government decided to anoint chief secretary for administration Carrie Lam as CE to succeed the policies of Leung Chun-ying. And although she appeared coy and uninterested in the job, preferring to look after her family, she knew her destiny was to run Hong Kong. Her future had been foretold.

The China Liaison Office in Hong Kong. Photo: HKFP.

Once that was decided by Beijing, the job of pushing through the process was left to the Liaison Office in The Westpoint, Sai Ying Pun.

Wikipedia states that the Liaison Office exists to promote the pro-Beijing United Front and coordinates pro-Beijing candidates, mobilises supporters to vote for “patriotic” political parties, and clandestinely orchestrates electoral campaigns. It supervises the mainland’s enterprises and three pro-Beijing newspapers, Ta Kung Pao, Wen Wei Pao and Commercial Daily in Hong Kong. It is also responsible for running the Chinese Communist Party cells in Hong Kong.

But Lam was not a popular civil servant. She was known to be tough and capable of getting the job done but her toughness brought her enemies within the civil service and the public. Her handling of the students in the Occupy Central protests drew grave criticism. The job of the Liaison Office was to mend fences. A gift was needed. During December 2016 Lam made frequent trips to Beijing to discuss “cultural” matters (a diplomatic term for clandestine operations).

On December 23, she returned to Hong Kong with a gift from the Central Government, a HK$3.5 billion replica of the famed Palace Museum. Although Hong Kong people hailed the gift, many criticised the secrecy involved, including the location (replacing a much-needed centre for performing arts) and appointment of the lead architect. The Palace Museum gift was the springboard to Lam’s foray in the CE race.

Then lo and behold within two weeks she announced her decision to resign from the SAR Government and run for the post of CE. Within a week, Mrs Lam’s resignation was accepted. Another contender John Tsang, who resigned as financial secretary a month earlier had to wait in purgatory for its acceptance after Lam. Suddenly the chief executive was abandoned by his generals and had to urgently find replacements to present the 2017/18 Budget and run the administration.

China Liaison Office director Zhang Xiaoming and Carrie Lam. File photo: Apple Daily.

Meanwhile, two other contenders – former Judge Woo Kwok-hing and legislator Regina Ip – announced their intentions to run in mid-December. Woo has no alliance with any political group and has been basically advocating for political reform. Ip, on the other hand, has wide political experience having served on both the Legislative and Executive Councils, formed a political party – the New People’s Party – and had a long civil service history finishing as secretary for security. Overall, she had the best credentials of all. However the public still remembered her failed attempts for security reforms.

But the Liaison Office was not happy with Tsang and Ip joining the race as both threatened the success of Lam. They offered Tsang the job as CEO of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank launched by the Central Government. He declined, preferring to run for CE. Ip was offered the presidency of the Legislative Council and posts in Beijing but she too declined, preferring the CE job. The Liaison Office had come to a stalemate; neither of the threats would quit the race.

The propaganda machine came into play. National People’s Congress delegates – former secretary for justice and deputy chair of the Basic Law Drafting Committee Elsie Leung, provisional president of the Legislative Council in 1997 Rita Fan and others – publicly restated, under instructions of the Liaison Office, Beijing’s desire that there shall be only two or three candidates for the chief executive post. One had to go.

The biggest threat to Lam was Ip because of her experience and thorough manifesto so she was the obvious choice to be thrown under the bus. The pressure was on. Phone calls from the Liaison Office or associates were made to every member of the nominating committee not to nominate Ip and to give their weight to Lam.

Legislator Michael Tien, deputy to Ip, spoke publicly about a call from the “invisible hand” (the Liaison Office) to give support to Lam. Civic Party lawmaker Dennis Kwok, co-ordinator of 300+ pan democratic votes said on TVB’s Straight Talk that he had heard of many such reports of calls from the Invisible Hand. Ip said she had calls from friends who wanted to support her but were told by their bosses not to.

Photo: Regina Ip, via Facebook.

All candidates were canvassing hard in the run-up to the nominating period. During her 77-day campaign, Ip met with 137 election committee members, non-government and various other organisations, attended 21 forums, 49 public events, 45 media interviews and produced a 20,000-word manifesto. Tsang and Woo took to the streets raising their public profiles and Tsang, in fact, secured much more popular support than Lam.

Lam, on the other hand, relied solely on the Liaison Office and her campaign team to secure about 400 nominations before releasing her manifesto two days before the close of nominations. At the close on March 1, Lam had received 580 votes, Woo 180 and Tsang 165. Ip withdrew just before the close due to lack of nominations. The Liaison Office had won.

On March 16, the SCMP reported that Beijing’s No. 3 official persuaded the powerful Li Ka-shing family, previously believed to be supporters of John Tsang, to back the former chief secretary. The Post quoted a source with knowledge of the matter saying that Li and his tycoon sons, Victor Li Tzar-kuoi and Richard Li Tzar-kai, shared a meal with National People’s Congress chairman Zhang Dejiang in Shenzhen last month. During the gathering the three were asked to cast their ballots for Lam and they agreed to back the former chief secretary, who is Beijing’s preferred candidate.

Almost every weekend prior to the elections clandestine meetings were held in Shenzhen with Beijing officials, members of the Hong Kong Liaison Office and election committee members to discuss the outcome of the March 26 chief executive elections. No names were ever mentioned for fear of reprisal.

So the elections were held and Beijing pulled off the 777 jackpot with its chosen winner. No surprises there.

Photo: GovHK.

Under the “One Country, Two Systems” principle and Hong Kong’s Basic Law Article 22 : “No department of the Central People’s Government and no province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government may interfere in the affairs which the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region administers on its own in accordance with this Law.”

The Liaison Office has clearly violated Article 22 by interfering with the election process, and the Central Government has lost all trust of the Hong Kong people in maintaining the One Country Two Systems principle.

https://www.hongkongfp.com/2017/04/02/role-beijings-invisible-hand-chief-executive-elections/