The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government announced details of the district council reform on May 2.
In terms of the electoral composition of the 470 councilors, 37.4 percent will be from indirect elections, 38 percent will be government-appointed representatives, 18.7 percent will be reserved for directly elected candidates, and 27 seats, or 5.7 percent, for ex-officio members. Candidates must pass qualification checks to ensure effective governance.
In my opinion, the plan not only ensures national security, but also implements fully the principle of patriots governing Hong Kong. Imposing qualification checks on candidates will ensure that the council functions as a non-political advisory body that complies with the executive-led principle. The district councils’ consulting and service functions will be consolidated. The chairperson of the district council served by a local district officer will better discharge leadership and coordination roles of assisting the government to grasp the pulse of the momentum in the community level.
District councils have played a decisive role in the administration and consultation of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government at the community level. Article 97 of the Basic Law clearly stipulates that “district organizations which are not organs of political power may be established in the Hong Kong SAR, to be consulted by the government of the Region on district administration and other affairs, or to be responsible for providing services in such fields as culture, recreation and environmental sanitation.” Unfortunately, the district councils were infiltrated by local anti-Chinese forces who twisted and altered its functions with malicious political intent to hamper, even to paralyze, the city’s governance for years.
The “black riots” in 2019 gave rise to non-patriotic forces and traitors in the SAR who seized the chance to hijack the district councils and turned the administrative body into battlefields of politics. They openly manipulated the councils, violently abusing them through exploiting local influence to advance the opposition camp’s nefarious political agenda. They blatantly resisted promulgation of the National Security Law and maliciously overturned the normal and necessary urban construction bills, causing serious damage to the livelihoods of thousands of families at grassroots level.
Tenure of the incumbent district councilors terminates at the yearend. It is worth mentioning that two-thirds of the 470 elected councilors could not take office after refusing to take the oath or taking it invalidly. The incumbent district councils have been left paralyzed, unable to perform their duties on many occasions. It was frustrating and unacceptable that dysfunctional district councils have failed to meet voters’ expectations for years. Therefore, it is time for the Hong Kong government to signify the original intention of the Basic Law and resume the functions of the district councils through reshuffling the administrative body. The city needs to learn the hard lessons of past failures and return to the right track without delay. Only when the district councils are able to play their roles to the full can a constructive atmosphere be created for the improvement of municipal affairs on a community level.
Regarding the reforms of the district councils, as the SAR government is actively reviewing them, I would like to propose the following four aspects for consideration and discussion:
First, the function and powers of district councils must be in accordance with the provisions of the Basic Law. The Basic Law has clearly stipulated that district councils should be “non-political” institutions. No matter how the next term of the district councils is formed, the Hong Kong government has the responsibility to prevent anti-China forces from grabbing seats and spoiling district affairs again. In addition, district councils should embody the essential concept of executive-led dominance in Hong Kong’s governance and dutifully serve as part of the administrative institution of the city in a proper way. Sensitive political matters should not be the focus of the district councils’ work and they should no longer be turned into political battlegrounds.
Second, district councils should cooperate closely with the SAR government to strengthen its consultative function and facilitate “top-down and bottom-up communication”. New councilors should be responsible for communicating and explaining the government’s policies to their constituencies, and boosting the popularity of the Hong Kong government. District councils should be a bridge that links the government with residents, enabling the government to acknowledge public opinion.
Furthermore, the composition of the revamped district councils must strike a balance between broad representativeness and effective governance. Previously, it was common practice to appoint social leaders, community leaders, and neighborhood representatives as district councilors to serve the community well. Such a practice of nominations deserves to resume as many of these capable hands keen to make their communities a better place are, by and large, unwilling to participate in election campaigns. These community influencers are necessary components in good community governance, and a portion of seats in district councils should be reserved for them. In view of this, direct elections cannot be the only way to recruit suitable people to participate in community governance. The reformed district councils should operate in a more diversified manner to achieve “balanced involvement”.
Finally, how to improve the reformed district council system and achieve efficient governance is a challenge that the government should seriously consider and thoroughly study. District councils will continue to be a valuable tool for effective community governance. Returning to the original intention of the Basic Law can help district councils to focus on community development and bring more benefits to urban governance.
It is the compelling obligation of members of the reformed district councils to connect the government and the people for effective and sustainable administration. If decisions are made only on the basis of position or political stance, and not on the basis of what’s right and wrong, who will take care of the welfare of the Hong Kong people?
The author is a member of China Retold, Civil Force spokesperson and chairman of Community Development Pulsation
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.