政治学与国际关系论坛

标题: 经济学人:香港选举试水中国式“功能性民主” [打印本页]

作者: chrisxsy    时间: 2010-12-10 19:42
标题: 经济学人:香港选举试水中国式“功能性民主”
  僵持五年之后,香港民主分子与中央政府终于达成妥协,为特区立法会最终通过争论激烈的政制改革方案铺平了道路,并由此避免了特区政府可能遭遇的政治尴尬。方案规定绝大多数立法会议员将由公众选举产生,这在香港历史上是头一遭,就是对整个中国而言,这些做法也是前所未有的。
  香港市中心立法会大楼前数百人的热闹游*表明,一揽子方案并不会终结关于民主改革的政治争斗。游*者抨击香港最大的泛民主组织民主党,说他们支持这一妥协就是放弃原则。截止本刊发稿前,立法会仍在激辩最具争议的改革--2012年立法会选举改革,但已同意对同年举行的特区行政长官选举进行修改。立法会的60名议员中,预计只有约12人会投票反对立法会选举改革的相关动议。反对者称,这个一揽子方案没有详细说明香港如何最终实现完全民主。一名民主党立法委员甚至**以示抗议。
  中央和港府达成的妥协更为引人注目。根据政改方案内容,下次选举的立法会议席总数将增至70席。其中,5个席位将进行直选,代表地方选区。另五个席位代表区议会,负责文化活动、环境项目等地方性事务。
  中央本来反对改变立法会中地区直选和"功能界别"--代表工商界、专业界以及其他利益团体--议席五五开的局面。由"功能界别"选出的委员大多是亲政府的。加上直选产生的亲政府议员,他们的选票确保了大多数议题都能体现港府和为其撑腰的中央政府的意志。
  泛民主派政治家要求到2020年,也就是中央政府承诺香港可以进行立法会普选的那年,废除功能界别,中央却不愿如此。但6月20日一位中央高官在与民主党领导人会谈时同意了该党大幅增加五个新增区议会议席的选民基础的提议。候选人因此将由直选区议员提名,并由无权在其他功能界别投票的登记选民(大约占选民总数的93%)选举产生。
  尽管听上去神秘又琐碎,但这与此前中央表现出的种种迹象相比,却是一个显著的大转弯。政府官员大概担心,如果他们在这点上不作让步,政制改革的一揽子方案就可能被立法会否决。对投票安排的修改需要得到2/3议员的支持,这实际上赋予了泛民主阵营以否决权。2005年,港府经历了严重的政治挫折,其首次政制改革尝试遭到了立法会议员的否决。
  民主党已因为不再坚持2012年普选全部议席而倍受其意识形态盟友的攻击。后者称,民主党同意扩大立法会中区议会议席的选民基础,就是默认了"功能界别"的理念,这也使今后说服中央废除这一制度变得更为困难。
  一揽子政改方案的通过意味着香港行政长官曾荫权不必再担心自己在2012年卸任前对民主建设无所建树。这一直是他和中央政府所公开宣称的目标,就像中央也明确表达了要在与民主派的博弈中取胜的愿望一样。接下来,就该轮到曾荫权的继任者与中央2012年的新任领导人同民主分子继续过招了。

英文原文:


Elections in Hong Kong
Functionally democratic
For once, a Chinese political concession
Jun 24th 2010 | Beijing
AFTER five years of stalemate, a compromise between Hong Kong’s democrats and Chinese officials has paved the way for the approval of fiercely debated political reforms by the territory’s legislature. This spares the local government potential embarrassment. It will allow a majority of legislators to be elected by popular vote for the first time in Hong Kong’s history. For China, too, these will be uncharted waters.
Noisy demonstrations by hundreds of people outside the Legislative Council, or Legco, building in central Hong Kong suggested that the package will not end political feuding over the pace of democratic reform. The demonstrators accused the Democratic Party, the biggest pro-democracy group, of abandoning its principles by supporting the compromise. As The Economist went to press, Legco was still debating the most controversial reforms, of the next Legco election in 2012, but had approved changes to the election for the chief executive in the same year. Of Legco’s 60 members only a dozen or so were expected to vote against the Legco-related motion. Objectors say the package fails to spell out how Hong Kong will eventually achieve full democracy. One Democratic Party legislator quit the party in protest.
Yet the concessions made by the Chinese and Hong Kong government are more striking. The reforms will increase the number of Legco seats to 70 in the next elections. Five of the new seats will be directly elected, representing geographical constituencies. The other five will represent district councils, which look after local issues such as cultural events and environmental projects.
Originally China had opposed any change in the equal split in Legco between geographical seats and those for “functional constituencies”, returned by business, professional and other interest groups. Members chosen by functional constituencies are mostly pro-government. Their votes, added to those of the handful of directly elected pro-government legislators, ensure that on most issues the government and its backers in Beijing get their way.
Pro-democracy politicians demand that functional constituencies be scrapped by 2020, which is when China has promised “universal suffrage” for Legco elections. China is reluctant to abolish them. But during talks with Democratic Party leaders on June 20th, a senior Chinese official agreed to the party’s proposal for the five new seats reserved for district councillors to be chosen by a much bigger electorate. The candidates would be nominated by district councillors, but everyone who does not have a vote in another functional constituency (about 93% of the electorate) would be allowed to pick the winners.
Arcane and trivial though it sounds, this was a remarkable turnaround from earlier Chinese hints. Officials probably worried that if they did not concede the point, the political-reform package might be rejected by Legco. Changes in voting arrangements need the support of two-thirds of legislators, which in effect gives the pro-democracy camp a veto. In 2005 the government suffered a severe political blow when legislators turned down its first attempt at political reform.
The Democratic Party has been bitterly attacked by its ideological allies for abandoning its earlier insistence on popular elections for all seats in 2012. They say that by accepting an expanded electoral base for the district council-filled seats, the Democratic Party has implicitly endorsed the idea of functional constituencies, and made it even harder to persuade China to abolish them.

Approval of the package means Donald Tsang, Hong Kong’s chief executive, no longer has to worry about leaving office in 2012 having made no progress towards greater democracy. That remains a stated goal of his and China’s governments, much as China clearly hopes to load the dice against democrats. It is for Mr Tsang’s successor, and new leaders who will take over in China too in 2012, to do battle with the democrats over the next steps.
(转载本文请注明“中国选举与治理网”首发)




欢迎光临 政治学与国际关系论坛 (http://bbs.newslist.com.cn/) Powered by Discuz! X3.2