Hong Kong holds breath after unofficial primary
HONG KONG — Defying warnings from local officials that the Hong Kong opposition’s unofficial primary vote could be illegal under a sweeping new security law, hundreds of thousands of people chose avowedly pro-democracy candidates to run in citywide elections this year, results released Monday showed.
Early returns showed that the more than 600,000 people who had voted favored candidates who were prominent supporters of the months of demonstrations that have gripped the semiautonomous Chinese city. Their choices indicated a desire to see the goals of the protest movement pressed within the government itself but could lead to an intensifying confrontation with authorities, who could bar some from running.
“So many people came out to vote despite the threat that it may violate the national security law,” said Lester Shum, a 27-year-old activist and candidate who was among the front-runners Monday. “That means Hong Kong people have still not given up.”
Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement has been hobbled by mass arrests at protests and by the new security law, which bans vaguely defined crimes of secession, subversion and terrorism and is already working to mute dissent. The one remaining avenue of resisting Beijing’s tightening grip over the city, they say, is to capture a majority in the legislature in September.
Hong Kong’s electoral system has long been weighted heavily in favor of the establishment that is backed by the Chinese Communist Party. Pro-Beijing parties are far better funded than the opposition.
Now they must contend with the new, far-reaching national security law imposed by the central Chinese government that makes speaking out against authorities possibly criminal. Opposition candidates, whose calls for democratic freedoms could be deemed as hostile to China’s ruling Communist Party, say they fear that whoever has protested the law could be disqualified from running or jailed. Even if they did succeed in being elected, there was no guarantee that the party would let them govern.
The turnout represented more than half of the opposition’s votes in 2016 and was several times higher than the organizers had expected. Voters went to polling stations set up on sidewalks as well as in unconventional venues such as a lingerie shop and a converted double-decker bus.
Just half of the 70 seats in the legislature represent geographical districts that are directly elected by voters. The other half are so-called functional constituencies, most chosen by corporate voting and more likely to go to establishment candidates. That tilted system has historically discouraged some Hong Kong residents from participating.
But in November, after months of antigovernment protests, voters turned out in large numbers for an election of Hong Kong’s district councilors, a low-level office that previously drew little attention. More than 7 in 10 eligible voters cast ballots, compared to a previous high of 47% — and delivered a victory for the pro-democracy camp, which swept 86% of the seats.
That victory emboldened protesters to set their eyes on the more ambitious target of elections for the Legislative Council, a far more powerful body. Their goal has taken on extra urgency as other displays of dissent have become increasingly perilous under the new security law.
If the pro-democracy candidates were able to capture a majority in the legislature, they could use their position to block the government’s agenda. Some have proposed vetoing the government’s budget, which could force the dissolution of the legislature. If a new legislature were also to block the budget, the chief executive would be forced to step down.
Erick Tsang, the constitutional affairs secretary, cited such a threat when he warned last week that the pro-democracy camp’s primary could potentially violate articles of the new national security law against secession and subversion.
Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s leader, repeated Tsang’s warning Monday that if the goal of the primary was to deliver a legislative majority for “resisting every policy initiative” of the Hong Kong government, then it “may fall into the category of subverting the state power” under the new security law.