The Congressional Executive Commission on China (CECC), an independent agency of the U.S. government, has published the 2017 version of its Annual Report on China and its dependencies, finding that the Macau SAR has made no progress toward building ‘‘an electoral system based on universal and equal suffrage.”
However, the Macau government says it disagrees with the evaluation and that the claims made in the report are “groundless and baseless.”
The CCEC expressed concern in its report over laws poised to take effect in Macau that restrict the ability of political candidates to stand for office. It also highlighted the oppressive rules enforced by electoral authorities in the run-up to the September 17 legislative election, and a lack of clear and proper documentation of the relevant prohibited activities.
“Macau’s Basic Law does not provide for elections by ‘universal suffrage,’ though its provisions ensure the applicability of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in Macau and guarantee Macau a ‘high degree of autonomy’ within China,” the report noted.
“During the 2017 reporting year, the Commission did not observe progress […] in line with the ICCPR, as recommended by the UN Human Rights Committee.”
The U.S. agency further questioned the delegation of authority to the Legislative Assembly Electoral Affairs Commission, a government entity, to determine who may qualify as a candidate to legislature.
The issue stems from a December 2016 revision to the Legislative Assembly electoral law, which now requires all candidates and legislators to swear allegiance to China and the MSAR. It followed an interpretation of Hong Kong’s Basic Law, handed down by mainland authorities, following the oath-taking scandal late last year.
As a consequence, the Electoral Affairs Commission has been empowered to use its discretion in determining a candidate’s eligibility, partially on the basis of whether it believes an oath was taken sincerely.
But the revision to the electoral law did not pass without vocal objections. Legal experts and pro-democrat lawmakers criticized the amendment and said that it endangered the already fragile state of democracy in the city.
According to the CCEC report, critics emphasized the problematic “lack of clearly defined criteria that would prove a candidate’s disloyalty to Macau or the Basic Law.”
The Electoral Affairs Commission’s strict interpretation of what constituted election propaganda, as well as how and when to apply penalties to electoral law violators was also included in the report. Citing the Macau Portuguese and English Press Association, the CCEC said, “due to the law’s broad definition of ‘electoral propaganda,’ election reporting could be penalized under the revised law.”
Such a case transpired in late August, when bilingual newspaper Plataforma was instructed to remove an article from its website as, according to the Electoral Affairs Commission, it included “electoral propaganda.” Plataforma responded by accusing the commission of confusing the concepts of propaganda and the right to inform.
The CCEC also highlighted a deteriorating situation over the admittance of Hong Kong journalists, lawmakers and political activists in 2017.
“Macau’s Internal Security Framework Law allows authorities to refuse entry to non-residents ‘considered inadmissible or who constitute a threat to the stability of internal security,’ but does not define inadmissibility or what would pose a threat to Macau’s security,” the report read.
The CCEC surmised that the refusal to admit certain non-residents had mostly occurred at sensitive times for the Macau government, such as in the aftermath of Typhoon Hato, the Legislative Assembly election last month and during visits to the city by high-profile mainland officials, such as Chinese Premier Li Keqiang.
The content of the report has riled the Macau SAR government, which on Friday issued a statement expressing its “strong opposition” to the CCEC findings.
“The 2017 annual report contains groundless and baseless claims, and made inappropriate comments about Macau’s internal affairs,” the local government said in the statement without clarifying the actual inaccuracies.
“Macau’s internal affairs are a domestic matter for China: foreign countries have no right to interfere in China’s domestic affairs,” the statement continued, echoing similar sentiments released by mainland authorities in previous years.
“Since the return to the motherland, the Macau SAR has been strictly implementing the principle of One country, two systems and the Basic Law, making significant achievements in various fields, that have been widely recognized by the international community.”
Report questions ‘interference’ in HK
A major finding in this year’s Congressional Executive Commission on China (CECC) report concerned what U.S. administrators see as diminishing political autonomy in Hong Kong. Drafters of the report noted that “the long-term viability of the ‘one country, two systems’ model in Hong Kong is increasingly uncertain given central government interference.” The assessment makes reference to the judicial interpretation handed down by Beijing during last year’s oath-taking scandal, which prevented two elected lawmakers from taking office. Other recent developments highlighting the erosion of Hong Kong’s political autonomy included the subsequent, retrospective disqualification of other lawmakers, the harsh sentencing of Occupy protestors last month, and general fears over the safeguarding of press freedom.
No Comments