对一国两制理解正确的选项（一国两制漫谈⑫）

作者：萧平

XIAO PING

资深时事评论员。

Why has 'dual universal suffrage' not been achieved in the SAR?

实现双普选是港人的愿望，也是基本法设定的政制发展目标。2015年6月18日，立法会的“民主派”议员否决了特区政府根据全国人大常委会“8.31”决定提出的政改方案，已经打开的双普选大门，被他们关上了！

It is one of the aspirations of Hong Kong people to implement “dual universal suffrage” in the special administrative region as well as the ultimate aim of electoral reforms set by the Basic Law. Unfortunately, the door to universal suffrage was shut by the “pan-democratic” lawmakers, who on June 18, 2015, vetoed the electoral reform package drafted and proposed by the HKSAR government based on the National People's Congress Standing Committee's decision issued on Aug 31, 2014 (the “8/31 decision”).

这已经不是第一次了。2005年也有一份扩大选举民主成分的政改方案被“民主派”捆绑否决，愤怒的市民从此给他们改名叫“反对派”。

This was not the first time the “pan-democratic” lawmakers blocked electoral reform. They already vetoed in 2005 another electoral reform package aimed at making the electoral process more democratic. They have since been dubbed by angry residents as the “opposition camp”.

可以理直气壮地说，中央才是香港普选问题上最大的民主派。中英联合声明没讲普选，是基本法确定了“最终达至”普选的目标。基本法第45条规定，行政长官“最终达至由一个有广泛代表性的提名委员会按民主程序提名后普选产生的目标”。第68条规定，立法会“最终达至全部议员由普选产生的目标。”2007年12月29日，全国人大常委会作出决定，给出了双普选的时间表，即2017年可以普选行政长官，随后可以普选立法会。2014年的“8.31”决定承接“12.29”决定，对行政长官普选办法的一些核心问题作出规定。如果没有开头那一幕，双普选已经落袋了。

Arguably, the central government is the leading proponent when it comes to implementing universal suffrage in Hong Kong. The Sino-British Joint Declaration makes no mention at all of universal suffrage. It is the central government that has set the “ultimate aim” of implementing universal suffrage in the HKSAR in the Basic Law. Article 45 reads “the ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage after nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures.” Article 68 says: “The ultimate aim is the election of all the members of the Legislative Council by universal suffrage”. On Dec 29, 2007, the NPCSC reached a decision that set the timetable for implementing universal suffrage for the chief executive in 2017 and for the Legislative Council later (12/29 decision). The “8/31 decision” supplements the“12/29 decision” by adopting specific rules over the election of the chief executive via universal suffrage. “Dual universal suffrage” would have been realized had the “pan-democratic” lawmakers not vetoed the electoral reform package in 2015.

反对派否决政改方案的理由是“8.31”决定有“筛选”，因而不是“真普选”，要求中央收回。他们指责的“筛选”有两点。一个是“提名权”，他们主张增加政党提名和公民提名，这变相架空了提名委员会，违反了基本法。另一个是“过半数”，他们不肯接受“每名候选人均须获得全体委员半数以上支持”的规定，要求“降低门槛”。谁都知道，少数服从多数是民主的通行规则，反对派连这个也反，说穿了就是担心推不出他们自己的候选人。

The opposition lawmakers claimed that the 2015 electoral reform package, which includes a “candidate screening mechanism”, is not one for “genuine universal suffrage”, and demanded the withdrawal of the “8/31 decision”. They also demanded modifications in the screening mechanism, including the addition of “civil nomination” and “party nomination” — a move aimed at encroaching on the Nominating Committee’s exclusive power and thus violates the Basic Law. Another modification they asked for was to lower the requirement of obtaining the support of more than half of the Nominating Committee members for a candidate to be qualified to run in the chief executive election. That the opposition camp was opposed to even the rule of majority — a universal democratic principle — suggested that they merely fretted over the gloomy prospect of their candidates joining the race.

筛选合理吗？解释这个问题，又要回到“一国”与“两制”的关系上了。基本法规定由提名委员会作为整体“机构提名”，“8.31”决定将基本法要求的“按民主程序提名”确定为“半数以上”，目的是要依靠多数人的理性，防止选出与中央对抗、最终伤及国家主权安全，也会给香港带来危害的行政长官候选人。香港虽然高度自治，但直辖于中央政府，不能与中央对抗，不能脱离中央的管治。邓小平有言在先，“港人治港”要以爱国者为主体。行政长官是“港人治港”的最高代表，必须由爱国爱港人士担任，“8.31”决定强调“这是‘一国两制’方针政策的基本要求”，“行政长官普选办法必须为此提供相应的制度保证”。

Is it justifiable to have a screening mechanism? To answer this question, one needs to understand the relationship between “one country” and “two systems”. The requirement of “institutional nomination” by the Nominating Committee as stipulated by the Basic Law and the requirement of support by more than half of the Nominating Committee members as required by the “8/31 decision” are intended to help screen out candidates who antagonize the central government, and who eventually would harm national security and Hong Kong’s interests — by means of the wisdom of majority. Although Hong Kong enjoys a high degree of autonomy, it is still directly under the central government and is never allowed to oppose the central government or resist its overall jurisdiction over the SAR. Late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping had made it unmistakably clear: “Hong Kong people governing Hong Kong” should mean the administration of Hong Kong affairs by “Hong Kong people, with patriots forming the main body of administrators”. The “8/31 decision” emphasizes that "this is the basic requirement of 'one country, two systems'", and that the method for the selection of the chief executive via universal suffrage must provide institutional safeguards for this requirement.

提名就是筛选，这一点毋庸讳言。美国由两大党提名总统候选人，英国由执政党提名首相，都是筛选。行政长官在“一国两制”中的角色太重要了，既对特区负责，也对中央负责；既要港人拥护，又要中央信任，惟其如此，参选人必须先过提名关，普选产生后还要经中央政府任命。明白了这一点，就会明白8.31决定退无可退。

Admittedly, nomination is a screening process. In the United States, the presidential candidates are nominated by the two dominant parties, and in the United Kingdom, the prime minister is nominated by the ruling party; both are a form of screening. The chief executive of the HKSAR is accountable to both the SAR and the central government. The role of the chief executive is so crucial to the successful implementation of “one country, two systems” that all candidates are rightly required to pass the nomination process to ensure that only candidates with both majority support and the trust of the central government are able to enter the race. Moreover, the chief executive-elect will need to be appointed by the central government. Clearly, there can be no compromise when it comes to the “8/31 decision” .

原文刊登于4月22日《中国日报香港版》

,