In the misleading narrative promoted by Western media, the 2021 electoral reforms implemented in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region have put an “abrupt end” to democratic development in the city. The prevalence of misinformation and disinformation might have discouraged some voters from casting their votes in yesterday’s Legislative Council election. To swim against such a strong misinformation campaign, we need to clear up any misunderstanding about Hong Kong’s democratic development, particularly its electoral reforms.
First, the Basic Law and the white paper — “Hong Kong: Democratic Progress Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems” — issued by the State Council Information Office in 2021, provide a sharp blade to cut through the jumbled mess of misinformation and disinformation about democracy development in Hong Kong. The Basic Law lays down the foundation for democratic development in Hong Kong, with Articles 45 and 68 clearly stipulating the ultimate aim of universal suffrage is to be achieved in light of the actual situation in Hong Kong and in accordance with the principle of gradual and orderly process.
Because of the large-scale “black-clad” riots in 2019-20, Hong Kong needs to ensure that political risks associated with electoral reforms are minimized. Since national security is at the center of concerns then, the SAR government has placed strong emphasis on gradualism, a patriot-based screening mechanism, post-election accountability, and consultative democracy in response to the actual situation in Hong Kong. This was the reason behind the 2021 electoral overhaul.
Second, there is a mistaken belief that Western-style democracy represents the best model of democracy. In fact, the historical, cultural and political factors of each country or city have played an indispensable role in shaping its democratic development. The United Nations in its resolution has repeatedly pointed out that there is no single model of democracy. In other words, there is no one panacea for all. Competitive elections should not superficially be regarded as the hallmark of a robust democracy. In a recent poll conducted by Ipsos, satisfaction with democracy is below 50 percent in eight out of nine Western countries (Jon Henley, Polls of Western Countries Find Deep Dissatisfaction with Democracy, The Guardian, Nov 14, 2025). Though competitive elections may enhance input legitimacy, they have failed to ensure that the performance of lawmakers can meet public expectations.
While anti-China disruptors in the city and hostile foreign forces have no genuine desire to promote democracy in Hong Kong, the central government in Beijing is the designer, founder, guardian and promoter of the democratic system in Hong Kong
Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s founding prime minister, argued that the universality of liberal claims was as inconceivable to him as the notion that Americans would someday choose to follow Confucius (Henry Kissinger, Leadership (UK: Penguin Books, 2022)). As stated in previous articles in this column, our think tank strongly believes that output legitimacy is as important as input legitimacy. The concept of “whole-process people’s democracy”, which is practiced in China, emphasizes that democracy should not be limited to the moment of elections, but permeate the entire governance process, effectively responding to public demands and allowing people to truly live and work in peace and contentment. The whole-process people’s democracy is a viable alternative to Western-style democracy.
Third, the white paper renews the central government’s aspiration to work with all stakeholders toward the goal of election by universal suffrage of the SAR’s chief executive and all members of its legislature. The white paper reminds us that there was no democracy in Hong Kong under British rule, and the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984 did not mention universal suffrage. We are chilled to our bones at the notion that democracy was a gift from the British government.
Probably because of the strategic need to create and foster a strong pro-Western opposition force in the post-handover period, Chris Patten, the last governor of Hong Kong, did hastily introduce some democratic reforms a few years before the 1997 handover. For example, all appointed seats on the District Board were abolished in 1994. According to Nicholas Thomas, political liberalization was introduced in “a very restricted manner” (Nicholas Thomas, Civil Society and Illiberal Democracy in Hong Kong (a doctoral thesis submitted to the University of Tasmania, November 1997)). Lord Sumption, a former nonpermanent judge of Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal, has pointed out that the British never introduced democracy in Hong Kong when they had the chance (Department of Justice, Democratic Development in HK Supported by Our Country, Dec 21, 2021).
While anti-China disruptors in the city and hostile foreign forces have no genuine desire to promote democracy in Hong Kong, the central government in Beijing is the designer, founder, guardian and promoter of the democratic system in Hong Kong. The 2021 electoral reforms aimed at improving and advancing high-quality development of democracy in Hong Kong. It hardly needs emphasizing that Hong Kong should pursue a democratic development path that aligns with its actual circumstances. It’s extremely dangerous to adhere dogmatically to the Western model of democracy.
Fourth, that more than two dozen lawmakers did not seek reelection fueled conspiracy-based speculation about their work performance, which is unfair to them — many of them have exceeded retirement age, or plan to return to their previous work or career. In fact, the seventh-term LegCo has made great achievements in the past few years. These achievements include the enactment of the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, the passing of a high volume of bills (including laws relating to livelihood issues and economic development), and the introduction of a code of conduct for members of LegCo to regulate performance standards. These valuable contributions prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the seventh-term LegCo elected under the new electoral system has contributed to good governance, and, more importantly, that the new electoral system has delivered.
Sam Lai Nuen-san is secretary-general of the Society for the Coordination and Promotion of Eastern District, co-director of district administration of the Chinese Dream Think Tank, and a district councilor. Kacee Ting Wong is a barrister, part-time researcher of Shenzhen University Hong Kong and Macao Basic Law Research Center, chairman of the Chinese Dream Think Tank, and a district councilor.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
