Hong Kong to limit direct elections for local councils to keep ‘black sheep’ out

Open this photo in gallery:

For years, Hong Kong’s district councils were the most democratic, least conspicuous part of the city’s government. Advising on local issues such as roads and waste management, they were dominated by pro-Beijing parties, which could afford to spend on low-turnout elections every four years while the pro-democracy opposition focused on higher-profile races for the city’s main legislature.

This all changed in 2019, after Hong Kong was rocked by months of anti-government protests. With police still surrounding the campus of Polytechnic University, which protesters had seized and occupied in what would turn out to be the denouement of the unrest, almost three million people turned out to vote – twice the number who took part in 2015.

Queues stretched around polling centres throughout the city, as voting stretched late into the night. When the results were finally released, they showed a landslide for pro-democracy parties, which took control of all 18 district councils. Pro-Beijing parties saw their representation decimated.

With another round of elections due this year, Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee said Tuesday that his government would take “pre-emptive action to prevent a repeat of what happened” in 2019. Under soon-to-be-unveiled reforms, he said, “certain electoral elements will be retained,” but seats will be filled by “patriots” through “multiple channels.”

“We must not allow the black sheep of the family to destroy our system,” Mr. Lee said. The reforms will cap a wider overhaul of Hong Kong’s electoral system, which had been trending in the direction of greater democracy before an abrupt about-face in recent years.

Amid the increasing violence of 2019, some pro-Beijing figures had expressed confidence that a supposed “silent majority” would emerge to show their dissatisfaction with the protesters. When voters sent the opposite message, electing not only traditional pro-democracy candidates but many radical, openly pro-independence figures, it appears to have been the final straw for China’s leaders.

On June 30, 2020, after the pandemic had already essentially stopped the protests, Beijing imposed a national-security law on Hong Kong, criminalizing secession, subversion and collusion with foreign forces.

Weeks later, opposition lawmakers and activists held an unofficial primary designed to thin the field of candidates ahead of legislative elections in September, hoping to build on the momentum of the 2019 results. That election was postponed on pandemic grounds, and 47 people connected to the primary were arrested under the national-security law. They are currently on trial, with lead organizers facing life in prison.

By the time a new legislature was chosen, in December, 2021, it was under a completely different system. New election rules halved the number of directly elected seats, and all candidates had to be vetted for their “patriotism” by a 1,500-member pro-Beijing election committee.

The majority of the 90-seat body was appointed by that same committee or picked by small-circle professional groups known as functional constituencies.

Local elections will likely follow a similar framework. A majority of district councillors resigned after the introduction of new requirements forcing them to take an oath of loyalty to Beijing. But that only showed that they were “absolutely every part of the problem,” Mr. Lee said Tuesday, adding he would “not allow district councils to be the platform to promote Hong Kong independence or anything which is against the Basic Law,” the city’s de facto constitution.

Such reforms were expected. Earlier this month, Beijing’s top representative in Hong Kong, Xia Baolong, reportedly told local officials that district councils should be “purely advisory bodies formed by patriots.”

On Saturday, former Hong Kong leader Leung Chun-ying, now an adviser to the Chinese government, said the bodies were designed to be “consultative” and there was no need for elections at all.

Mr. Lee said the coming reforms will “enhance governance at the district level.” He has repeatedly claimed that the overhauled legislature is more efficient without opposition figures filibustering or questioning government work.

But John Burns, an emeritus professor of politics and public administration at Hong Kong University, warned that the loss of competitive elections would not just rob voters of representation.

“If the government listens only to the opinion of patriots of its own choosing, organized in loud, one-dimensional echo chambers, authorities cannot understand people’s needs and concerns,” he wrote last week.

“Government desperately needs a better understanding of what the community needs, our priorities, and our hopes for the future. Authentic participation is the key to rebuilding trust and legitimacy.”