Rear Window | Changing the game

Severo Portela

No need to resort to the disclaimer of “noblesse-oblige” to give credit where credit is due. And the credit goes to the solo runner to take over Chui Sai On’s seat, or the Chief Executive in-the waiting, who became the first CE candidate to meet with pro-democracy representatives from the New Macau Association. Believe it or not, nobody before Ho Iat Seng cared to exchange ideas with the pro-democracy association which represents a substantial slice of the SAR voters for the directly elected legislators in the Legislative Assembly. The slice should be fatter without that hybrid Hondt safety-pin shrinking the liberal vote.

We deem Ho Iat Seng’s stint at the helm of the Legislature to be controversial, authoritarian and faulty in dealing with in-house political stuff, with a rubber-stamping eagerness to the stuff from the Executive branch. We also acknowledge him to be a political heavyweight given his national-level credentials and being a seasoned entrepreneur; so much of his credibility hinged on the conservatives and the pro-business elite vouching for his candidature. The outcome of the 400 participants in the small circle step, prior to the actual voting, gave Ho the local political credentials at this level of democratic credibility. You might call it democratic, but it will not answer to the name.

The former president of the Legislature could easily make his case from the small-circle endorsement, and – calling upon that blind tradition to marginalize pro-democracy militants, while also harking to an exogenous environment we describe as the oppressive heat in Hong Kong – pure and simply ignore Sulu Sou and the New Macau Association. Ho Iat Seng decided differently and took a leap of faith towards normalization with his nemesis at the Legislative Assembly. It worked well for both Sulu and the next Chief Executive.

Not quite I scratch your back, you scratch mine, but both the legislator and the future Chief Executive agreed on the groundwork for democratic development. On one hand, Beijing’s authority in political reform is a given; on the other, the responsibility to initiate and promote change is with the Macau Special Administrative Region.

The mere formalities leave both Ho and Sou with no strings attached: the CE-to-be is not ruling out political reform and universal suffrage in his tenure; Sulu is not ruling out a relentless drive towards that objective.

Ho Iat Seng told ANM that perhaps political reform would be initiated by the younger generations, in what could be taken as an apparent logical device to delay political reform. Sulu Sou ignored the antics and allegedly replied: if we keep waiting, we cannot tell whether we can realize universal suffrage on or before 2049.

Anyway, an immediate consequence of Ho Iat Seng’s compromise on the principle of political development may be a political casualty: Secretary for Administration and Justice vis a vis the casting of the next government.

This consensus between the CE-to-be and the democrats should not diminish other proposals the New Macau Association presented under the auspicious eight requests. NMA wants the government to submit major expenditure for AL approval, this way shifting the exclusive prerogative for the budget that the Basic Law gives to the Executive; they want the CE to attend sessions more frequently – Ho agrees. Sulu sees Ho as strategic to gain space and time for public debates.

We choose the invitation to “safeguard the autonomy and fundamental rights” as the ultimate political maneuver. If you agree, NMA wins; if you disagree, NMA wins.

Finally, we highlight that Ho Iat Seng said that Macau will have a trade union law, including the right to strike. Believe it or not, Macau is the only place in China without trade union legislation.

For reasons everyone knows, that law should be called, unofficially, the Pereira Coutinho Law.