This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/hong-kong-consults-public-on-political-reform-but-signals-intransigence-arrests/2015/01/07/9ebd72a6-524a-4703-a5dc-3d565fa3fc0c_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Hong Kong “consults public” on political reform, but signals intransigence, arrests Hong Kong ‘consults public’ on political reform, but signals intransigence, arrests
(about 4 hours later)
BEIJING – Hong Kong’s government launched a second round of “public consultations” on political reform on Wednesday, even as it signaled its refusal to yield ground to demands for greater democracy, and as police threatened to arrest the leaders of last year’s protest movement. BEIJING – Hong Kong’s government launched a second round of “public consultations” on political reform on Wednesday even as it signaled its refusal to yield ground to demands for greater democracy.
The Chinese government in Beijing laid out in detail last August how it wants elections for the semi-autonomous territory’s chief executive to take place in 2017, allowing universal suffrage but demanding control over who can run in the election, a condition that infuriates pro-democracy groups. Police, meanwhile, threatened to arrest the leaders of last year’s protest movement sparked by Beijing’s plan to vet election candidates in the former British colony.
Hong Kong’s government says that ruling cannot be questioned, leaving very little room for maneuver during this round of public consultations, barring some minor, technical details on how the two-stage process for nominating candidates would proceed. The rallies and occupation-style protest camps marked the most serious challenge to authorities since Hong Kong came under Chinese control in 1997.
The start of the consultation process comes a day after the Hong Kong government submitted a report to Beijing laying out the major events during the two-month-long pro-democracy protests, and with the government and democrats as far apart as ever. Hong Kong’s government said Beijing’s decision on the election process cannot be questioned — allowing universal suffrage, but placing controls over who can be on the ballot for chief executive in 2017.
Even writing such a report had been presented by the government as a concession during talks with the protesters, but the document failed to satisfy protest leaders who variously denounced it as “poison,” “a waste of paper” and “a collection of news clippings and trash talk.” That leaves very little room to maneuver during this round of public consultations, barring some minor, technical details on the two-stage process for nominating candidates.
The report described the pro-democracy movement as a “series of unlawful rallies,” that had blocked roads and “aroused widespread concern in the community.” The start of the consultation process comes a day after the Hong Kong government submitted a report to Beijing laying out the major events during the two-month-long pro-democracy protests, and with the government and opposition factions as far apart as ever.
It went on to conclude that it was “the common aspiration” of the central government, the Hong Kong government and the people of Hong Kong to implement universal suffrage in accordance with the rules set down by Beijing. Even writing such a report had been presented by the government as a concession during talks with the protesters. But the document failed to satisfy protest leaders who variously denounced it as “poison,” “a waste of paper” and “a collection of news clippings and trash talk.”
That conclusion did not impress student leader Lester Shum, who said it would “only make people angrier.” He described the report itself as a collection of news clippings that could have been put together by a secondary school student, while others said it lacked analysis or investigation, and twisted public opinion. The report described the pro-democracy movement as a “series of unlawful rallies” that had blocked roads and “aroused widespread concern in the community.”
It went on to conclude that it was “the common aspiration” of officials and the people of Hong Kong to implement universal suffrage in accordance with the rules set down by Beijing.
That conclusion did not impress student leader Lester Shum, who said it would “only make people angrier.” He described the report itself as a collection of news clippings that could have been put together by a secondary school student, while others said it lacked analysis or investigation.
Eighteen-year-old student leader Joshua Wong said writing the report was supposed to have been a concession — or a sweetener — from the government, “but it is actually poison, not even wrapped in a sweet coating.”Eighteen-year-old student leader Joshua Wong said writing the report was supposed to have been a concession — or a sweetener — from the government, “but it is actually poison, not even wrapped in a sweet coating.”
Shum and Wong said police had phoned them this week and told to report later this month, when they would face arrest for participating in an unlawful assembly and possibly other charges.Shum and Wong said police had phoned them this week and told to report later this month, when they would face arrest for participating in an unlawful assembly and possibly other charges.
The South China Morning Post said more than 30 protest leaders would be charged, including at least four pro-democracy lawmakers, but would then be granted bail, while a further 100 could face arrest in a second phase of the operation.The South China Morning Post said more than 30 protest leaders would be charged, including at least four pro-democracy lawmakers, but would then be granted bail, while a further 100 could face arrest in a second phase of the operation.
Hong Kong 2020, a lobby group founded by the territory’s former chief bureaucrat Anson Chan, said the government report “fails totally to convey the deep sense of disappointment and betrayal felt by Hong Kong people” about Beijing’s August ruling. Like other pro-democracy groups, it argues that Beijing’s decision contravened the territory’s own mini-constitution, or Basic Law, a point contested by the Hong Kong government. Anson Chan, who was the territory’s chief bureaucrat immediately after the handover from British rule, said there was no point in having a public consultation process when the government had shown “no desire to forge a consensus” and left “no room for maneuver” in what reforms could take place.
“The Basic Law promises us the right to elect our Chief Executive by universal suffrage, but we are now being fobbed off with a sham version of democracy that makes a mockery of this promise. This is why people are angry,” Hong Kong 2020 said. The government’s report, she said in a telephone interview, “had completely failed to bring out why people are so angry and so frustrated.
But the territory’s Chief Executive, Leung Chun-ying said threatening the governments in Hong Kong and Beijing would not work. “It is increasingly clear that Hong Kong is being governed by Beijing,” she said.
"Past experience showed these illegal or disruptive acts, that threaten social order, cannot force the Central Government or the Hong Kong government to put into law something that is not in accordance with the Basic Law,” he said in a news conference, according to his website. Launching the public consultation process in the territory’s legislature, Chief Secretary Carrie Lam said the government respected freedom of expression, but said it would be “futile and impractical” to ask for constitutional reform beyond the decisions from the Communist Party.
After the two-month-long public consultation process, the government will have to submit its proposals for political reform to the territory’s legislature. But with pro-democracy legislators vowing to block any proposals that do not amount to “genuine democracy,” — and to boycott the "fake consultation process" — another showdown is looming. “If people ignore legal and political realities or even resort to disrupting public peace and undermining other people’s rights, the so-called ‘pursuit of the ideal’ or ‘fight to justice’ is just empty talk,” she said.
If legislators fail to agree on a reform package, the chief executive would be chosen in 2017 as Leung was, voted in by a 1,200-strong election committee stacked with Beijing loyalists. After the two-month public consultation process, the government plans to submit its proposals for political reform to the territory’s legislature. But pro-democracy legislators vow to block any proposals that do not amount to “genuine democracy,” setting the stage for another possible showdown.
On Wednesday, pro-democracy lawmakers reacted to Lam’s statement by unfurling yellow umbrellas – the symbol of the protest movement – and walking out of the legislature.
If legislators fail to agree on a reform package, the chief executive would be chosen in 2017 the same way the current leader, Leung Chun-ying, took office — voted in by a 1,200-strong election committee stacked with Beijing loyalists.
Kris Cheng Lok-chit in Hong Kong contributed to this report.Kris Cheng Lok-chit in Hong Kong contributed to this report.