Hong Kong awakens to politics

HONG KONG — Passions rarely run high in this prosperous port city, where order and stability have been cherished for decades and where risk taking is not a virtue when it comes to politics.

But, as Hong Kong prepares to vote Sunday in legislative elections, a new spirit boldly defies that old stereotype.

“Everything today is being politicized, not unlike the United States, and you have a divided community,” said Frank Martin, president of the American Chamber of Commerce here.

“Previously, there was a fairly high level of political apathy in Hong Kong, and I don’t think that is true today,” he said.

Although political parties have existed in the former British colony for more than a decade, politics and governing interested few in earnest.

That changed last year, when the government of the Beijing-appointed chief executive, Tung Chee-hwa, introduced draconian national security legislation targeting treason, sedition and subversion against the Chinese government in Beijing.

Dissatisfaction with Mr. Tung’s policies had been simmering since the territory’s 1997 turnover from Britain.

Still, many gave Mr. Tung the benefit of the doubt, especially on the economy, which suffered because of external factors, such as the 1997 Asian financial crisis, the global economic turndown and the outbreak of the deadly severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) last year.

“Over the past seven years, we’ve had a whole litany of blunders,” said Christine Loh, chief executive officer of Civic Exchange, a nonpartisan think tank.

“This particular government seems to have a very weak intellectual basis,” she said. “It can’t really articulate its political philosophy, and it can’t put philosophy and policy together, so it’s a big mess.”

But nothing prepared the government for the emotional reaction to the national security legislation, known as Article 23 of the Basic Law.

Public dissatisfaction culminated with an unprecedented protest of 500,000 people, who marched peacefully in Victoria Park on July 1, 2003.

Negative reaction on the law had been pouring in from almost all parts of society, including powerful business interests that generally had been supportive of Mr. Tung’s government.

“Last year, the government came out with a draft of Article 23, and it was terrible, really badly written,” said David O’Rear, chief economist of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce.

“So we had our legal committee analyze and compare it to other laws around the world, and it said it was ridiculous,” he said.

Story Continues →