The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region at 20

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-101
Author(s):  
Tim Summers
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Occupy Movement ◽  
Joint Declaration ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
Basic Rights ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One ◽  
High Degree

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the two decades since Hong Kong’s return to Chinese sovereignty, assessing developments against the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, the international agreement under which Hong Kong was transferred from British to Chinese sovereignty on July 1, 1997, and which first set out China’s “basic policies” toward Hong Kong. Design/methodology/approach The paper’s analysis of developments focuses particularly on areas of controversy, from the extent to which Hong Kong has enjoyed a “high degree of autonomy” to basic rights and freedoms and the legal and judicial systems. Findings It argues that on the whole, the policies set out in the Joint Declaration have been well implemented: Hong Kong has retained its separate systems since 1997, including rule of law and an independent judiciary, basic rights and freedoms, and separate government and social systems. However, especially since the “occupy” movement of 2014, questions about the sustainability of the “one country, two systems” arrangement have come to the surface. Originality/value The paper is distinctive in its assessment of developments against the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration.

One Country, Two Systems

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
The State ◽  
Deng Xiaoping ◽  
Systems Model ◽  
The People ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One

Deng Xiaoping (b. 1903–d. 1997) secured power and launched a policy program of economic reforms and an opening to the external world at the end of 1978. He also initiated a peace offensive toward Taiwan, and had to face a new challenge in China’s Hong Kong policy. In January 1979, the Chinese authorities announced a nine-point proposal for solving the Taiwan issue and guaranteed that after reunification, the existing economic and social systems, as well as the way of life, would remain unchanged. Subsequently, the new Constitution of the People’s Republic of China promulgated in December 1982 contains a new provision; Article 31 states, “The state may establish special administrative regions (SAR) when necessary” (available online). In March 1979, Sir Murray MacLehose (b. 1917–d. 2000), then Governor of Hong Kong, visited Beijing. He met Deng Xiaoping and formally raised “the New Territories lease” question. Chinese leaders gradually began to understand that the Hong Kong future issue could no longer be delayed. The view of recovery gained a distinct edge; Liao Chengzhi (b. 1908–d. 1983), head of the newly established Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council, was given the responsibility of planning for the recovery of the territory. In April 1981, he proposed the “one country, two systems” model policy, which demonstrated the Chinese leadership’s liberation in thinking at that time. The leadership was eager to show the world that China could govern Hong Kong better than the British colonial administration; it wanted the Hong Kong model to have a significant demonstration effect on Taiwan. The policy played a key role in maintaining the confidence of Hong Kong people, and facilitated Chinese leaders’ success in the Sino-British negotiations on the territory’s future. In the decade and a half since Hong Kong’s return to China, the “one country, two systems” model has been working quite well. Stability and prosperity have been maintained; the rule of law and the freedoms enjoyed by the people have been largely intact. Hong Kong’s relative international economic competitiveness has been in slow decline, and the economy has become increasingly dependent on that of Mainland China.

The ties that bind: mutuality of political destiny between Hong Kong and Taiwan

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-148
Author(s):  
Wai Kwok Benson Wong
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Self Identity ◽  
Bonding Effect ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
Negative Perceptions ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One ◽  
Ruling Party

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explain how post-1997 Hong Kong has been perceived in Taiwan and to critically evaluate the demonstration effects of Hong Kong under the “One Country, Two Systems” policy on cross-strait relations. Design/methodology/approach “Today’s Hong Kong, Tomorrow’s Taiwan” has become a dominant discourse in cross-strait relations in recent years. The paper has adopted discourse analysis of selected texts during and after the 2014 Sunflower Movement to elucidate the disapproval of the developments of post-handover Hong Kong and the construction of the Movement’s self-identity. Findings It has observed the following arguments which shaped the prevailing perceptions among critics of the “One Country, Two Systems” policy: political infiltration of China in Hong Kong could be extended to Taiwan in the sense that the Beijing authorities would adopt the identical approach to manipulate Taiwan through the cross-strait trading agreements; negative perceptions and images of China and Chinese capitals as a collective aggressor and a threat, raising fear and worries in both Hong Kong and Taiwan; and Kuomintang, as a ruling party at that time under the leadership of President Ma Ying-jeoh, was dismissed by protesters as an incompetent gatekeeper and defender of Taiwan’s interests. Originality/value The pervasive sentiments and perceptions about post-1997 Hong Kong has been articulated discursively by the young activists in Taiwan and Hong Kong into a statement – “Today’s Hong Kong, Tomorrow’s Taiwan” – which has brought about a somewhat unexpected bonding effect between Hong Kong and Taiwan through a strong disapproval of “One Country, Two Systems” and the China factor, which has be reproduced, delivered and circulated in both societies since 2014.

scholarly journals Red capital in Hong Kong

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi Wang-Kaeding ◽  
Malte Philipp Kaeding
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
The Political ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Comparative Capitalism ◽  
Liberal Societies ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One ◽  
Systems Framework ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of this paper is threefold: first, to recount the scale, composition and agents of red capital in Hong Kong; second, to conceptualise the peculiarity of red capital; and third, to explore the impact of red capital on the political and economic institutional setup in Hong Kong. Design/methodology/approach The paper consults the comparative capitalism literature to conceptualise the phenomenon of red capital. The paper gathers data from Hong Kong Stock Exchange and indices to provide an overview of red capital. Furthermore, the case study of 2016 Legislative Election is deployed to investigate the mechanisms of red capital’s influence. The paper concludes with a summary of how red capital may challenge the validity of the “One Country, Two Systems” framework. Findings This paper argues that red capital replicates China’s state–capital nexus in Hong Kong and morphs the game of competition in favour of Chinese nationally controlled companies. In tandem with the emerging visibility of the party–state in Hong Kong’s economic sphere, the authors observe attempts of Chinese economic actors to compromise democratic institutions, deemed obstacles to state control. Originality/value This paper is the first attempt to systematically embed the discussion of red capital into comparative capitalism literature. This study provides conceptual tools to examine why red capital could pose a threat to liberal societies such as Hong Kong. Through this paper, we introduce a novel research agenda to scrutinise capital from authoritarian states and investigate how the capital is changing the political infrastructure shaped by liberal principles and values.

The review of one country two systems of Hong Kong over two decades from the perspective of social development

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 511-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sum Yeung
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Social Development ◽  
Social Mobility ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Colonial Rule ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
British Colonial ◽  
High Degree

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to study the development of one country two systems of Hong Kong over two decades and examine its challenges and prospect. One country two systems is pragmatic and compromise principle and social arrangement for Hong Kong under China sovereignty. It has served to resolve some issues related to the future of Hong Kong after the end of British Colonial rule since July 1, 1997. There are lessons to be learnt as the merits and flaws of the system have been identified in the study as perceived from the perspective of social development. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on quantitative methodology. Data of public opinion polls conducted by various local universities on the development of one country two systems of Hong Kong have been employed in the study. Based on the data obtained from the relevant survey, different aspects of social development of Hong Kong under one country two systems has been examined and explored. Data are current and up-to-date to reflect the social mood of Hong Kong people toward one country two systems over the years. Findings The challenges and prospect of one country two systems of Hong Kong over two decades since the change of sovereignty have been identified in this paper. Hong Kong has remained the moist free market and the third financial center in the world. However, the high degree of self-autonomy as stipulated in the Basic Law has been fading way. There is social discontent of Hong Kong people on social and political grounds and there are high sense of mistrust to both Hong Kong SAR (HKSAR) government and the Central government in Beijing. This will provide a guideline to the government for improving the situation. Research limitations/implications The study is based on data obtained from various public opinion conducted by several local university on the development of one country two systems and how Hong Kong people feel about it. The data are current and up-to-date. However, there will be variation of findings as social mood and perception of Hong Kong people toward one country two systems may change due to the changes of social and political events. With these limitations, one needs to be careful while drawing the conclusion. Yet, the over trend of social development of Hong Kong can be seen. Practical implications The study will provide an overall view and assessment of one country two systems of Hong Kong over two decades after the change of sovereignty since July 1, 1997. The findings and discussion of social mobility, quality of life, income disparity, social and political movement and ethnic identity and its changes in recent years of people in Hong Kong are rather revealing. It will provide a reality check and yardstick for people who are concerned about Hong Kong society and its people under China sovereignty. Social implications The study and its findings will provide a useful guideline for people who are concerned about how Hong Kong people live under China sovereignty. Hong Kong to most of Hong Kong people is on longer a borrow place living under the borrowed time. The former British Colonial rule has been replaced by HKSAR government rule under China sovereignty. There is a high degree of mistrust toward both HKSAR government and the Central government in Beijing. People in Hong Kong keep fighting for democracy and high degree of self-autonomy. Hence, Hong Kong is still a free and open society under China sovereignty. Originality/value The paper contributes an original study on the development of one country two systems of Hong Kong under China sovereignty as perceived from the perspective of social development. There are important findings on social mobility, income disparity and issues of ethnic identity of Hong Kong people. The lessons of Hong Kong will provide an interesting case for people who care concerned about how people living in a former British colony has transformed the society into a thriving civil society under China sovereignty.

Canaries or Colonials? The Reduced Prominence of the ‘Overseas Judges’ on Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal

2022 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Stuart Hargreaves
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
The Status ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
The One ◽  
Systems Framework ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Typically one member of a sitting panel of Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal is a senior jurist drawn from another common law jurisdiction. In the Court's early years, these ‘overseas judges’ were responsible for writing approximately one quarter of the lead opinions across a vast range of cases. This article demonstrates, however, that this practice has changed. The overseas judges now write a smaller share of lead opinions and no longer write lead opinions related to issues of fundamental human rights or the relationship between Hong Kong and the rest of China. This article suggests this change has been made for good reason. Though valid questions about the legitimacy of the role of the overseas judges can be made, they also continue to perform a valuable communicative role regarding the status of Hong Kong's judicial independence under the ‘one country, two systems’ framework. A recent rise in attacks on overseas and other ‘foreign’ judges in Hong Kong can be understood as part of a broader project that seeks to constrain the role of the independent judiciary. By continuing to invite overseas judges to sit on the Court of Final Appeal but reducing their public prominence, the Court has sought not only to reduce avenues for attacks on the legitimacy of particular decisions, but to protect the autonomy and independence of the judiciary more broadly.

One Country, Two Nationalisms: Center-Periphery Relations between Mainland China and Hong Kong, 1997–2016

Modern China ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 523-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian C. H. Fong
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Joint Declaration ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
Twentieth Anniversary ◽  
City State ◽  
Political Economic ◽  
High Degree

According to the Sino-British Joint Declaration and Basic Law, Hong Kong was to exercise a high degree of autonomy under the framework of “one country, two systems” after the British handover of its sovereignty to China in 1997. In the initial post-handover period, Beijing adopted a policy of nonintervention in Hong Kong, but the outbreak of the July 1, 2003 protest triggered a subsequent change of policy. Since then, Beijing has embarked on state-building nationalism, adopting incorporation strategies so as to subject Hong Kong to greater central control over the political, economic, and ideological arenas. Ironically, instead of successfully assimilating Hongkongese into one Chinese nation, Beijing’s incorporation strategies are leading to a rise of peripheral nationalism in the city-state and waves of counter-mobilization. This article analyzes mainland–Hong Kong relations on the eve of the twentieth anniversary of the handover and offers insights from an emerging case study that builds upon the nationalism literature.

“One country, two systems” after the Umbrella movement: problems and prospects

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 385-400 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chor-yung Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
The Political ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
The One

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to assess critically the political challenges facing Hong Kong’s “one country, two systems” policy following the Umbrella Movement and to evaluate the territory’s democratic and autonomous future. Design/methodology/approach A critical, contextual, and analytical approach has been adopted to evaluate the problems and prospects for post-Umbrella Movement Hong Kong. Findings The contradictions embedded in the “one country, two systems” policy have become apparent since the Umbrella Movement arose and Hong Kong’s political and democratic future is as problematic as its prospects are uncertain, though the possibility of some rapprochement between Hong Kong and Beijing should not be ruled out completely. Research limitations/implications The critical evaluation offered by this paper is no scientific prediction. Social scientific analysis of this kind is suggestive rather than definitive. The informed discussion offered by this paper will help readers to better understand the strengths and weaknesses inherent in Beijing’s “one country, two systems” policy and the tortuous process of democratization in Hong Kong. The conclusion drawn in the paper points to a possible way out of the political impasse that is facing post-Umbrella Movement Hong Kong. Originality/value This paper is a pioneering study of the most important political conflict between Beijing and Hong Kong since 1997, the conclusion of which may have important political and policy implications for both China and Hong Kong.

scholarly journals The challenges facing the next Chief Executive of Hong Kong in 2022: managing growth, conflict, change and continuity

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Regina Suk-yee Ip Lau
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
Central Authority ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Unique Character ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
High Degree

PurposeThis article outlines the challenges faced by the next Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) in 2022 – the need to address economic problems resulting from Hong Kong’s slow growth; its inability to restructure its economy to broaden job opportunities and improve upward mobility for young people; and the government’s belated attempt to deploy innovation and technology.Design/methodology/approachThis article is based on the author’s in-depth analysis of the current situation and insights on the challenges faced by the next Chief Executive.FindingsTensions are inherent in the concept of “One Country, Two Systems”. Back in November 2012, Deputy Director of the Hong Kong and Macao Office Zhang Xiaoming already reminded Hong Kong of the need to manage well three sets of relationships: (1) maintaining the “One Country” principle while preserving the SARs’ “separate systems”; (2) upholding Central Authority while preserving the SARs’ “high degree of autonomy”; and (3) unleashing the economic potential of mainland China while raising the competitiveness of the SARs. These three sets of relationships represent three fundamental difficulties in implementing “One Country, Two Systems”. However, Hong Kong kept ignoring Beijing’s advice and failed to resolve the tension between the mainland and Hong Kong SAR, culminating in the riotous events of 2019, which morphed into a dangerous, anti-China insurgency.Originality/valueThe next Chief Executive needs to mediate between the constitutional requirements of the Central Authority while preserving Hong Kong SAR’s “high degree of autonomy”, its unique character and lifestyle. He or she also needs to deal with continuity and change. Hong Kong cannot stand still, and should not allow itself to be lulled by the “50 years no change” mantra into overlooking the need to move with the times. Much reform needs to be implemented by the next Chief Executive to give people hope, faith in “One Country, Two Systems” and true love of the country.

The Basic Law of the Special Administrative Region of Macau: Some Reflections

2000 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yash Ghai
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Primary Concern ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The People ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
Constitutional System ◽  
High Degree

With China's resumption of sovereignty over Macau on 20th December 1999, another step was taken towards the reunification of Greater China. The reunification of Macau as of Hong Kong is based on the principle of “one country, two systems’, under which the socialist systems of the People's Republic of China are not applied in these territories. Instead most constituents of their previous economic, legal and social systems are preserved. In either case China negotiated what are called Joint Declarations for the resumption of sovereignty with the colonial power, under which the terms of “one country, two systems’ were spelled out. China undertook to give effect to the Declarations in Basic Laws, passed by its National People's Congress. Except for defence and foreign affairs, most matters are vested in the new entities, called Special Administrative Regions. The Basic Laws describe the constitutional system established for the regions as being characterised by a “high degree of autonomy’. As such they are an interesting addition to autonomy systems which are increasingly being applied as solutions to problems of divided societies. But the institutional support for the autonomy is particularly weak, and a closer examination of the articulation of the regions with the central authorities suggests that the primary concern in establishing the special administrative regions is less the automony for the people of Hong Kong or Macau as finding a framework for managing different economic systems from those on the mainland (I have developed these arguments in Ghai 1999).

The unfinished chapter of Hong Kong’s long political transition

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-276
Author(s):  
Tai-Lok Lui
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Political Transition ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
The Political ◽  
Authoritarian Rule ◽  
Political Status ◽  
Joint Declaration ◽  
Social Protests ◽  
One Country Two Systems ◽  
High Degree

In hindsight, that the institutional framework of ‘One Country, Two Systems’ (OCTS), the political and socio-economic blueprint for ensuring the continuity of Hong Kong as a capitalist economy, with guarantees of freedom of speech and a high degree of autonomy from China’s socialist and authoritarian rule after a change of sovereignty in 1997, gets caught in political crossfire is inevitable. OCTS was a historical compromise in the early 1980s when the deadlock of Hong Kong’s uncertain political future was resolved by finding a way to convince all the concerned parties that the colony’s prosperity and stability would be guaranteed after a change in its political status. But the premises and parameters of the pact have significantly changed since the signing of the Joint Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong by China and Britain in 1984. The storm over the Extradition Bill has its roots in the fissures inherent in the institutional framework of OCTS. This paper is an attempt to analyse social protests arising from the Extradition Bill in Hong Kong in 2019 in the light of the former British colony’s extended political transition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document