Occupy Central co-founder Benny Tai’s controversial proposal to achieve universal suffrage

HKU law professor Benny Tai is among Hong Kong academics targeted over their remarks on the city’s independence.
HKU law professor Benny Tai is among Hong Kong academics targeted over their remarks on the city’s independence.

Benny Tai, one of the three co-founders of Occupy Central, proposed that Article 23 legislation be drafted together with “true” universal suffrage as a form of compromise in an op-ed published in Apple Daily yesterday. 

Below is a full translation of his op-ed.


The Article 23 and universal suffrage deadlock

Throughout the universal suffrage controversy, Beijing has long insisted that Hong Kong’s must take national security into account in the city’s political development. Yet the Hong Kong government has refrained from any bullish moves in fear of a repeat of the large-scale protest in 2003.

And as rumour has it, one of CY Leung’s assignments during his term is the implementation of Article 23. Judging from his handling of the Umbrella Movement, a push for the article would surely result in a street protest larger than the July 1 demonstration in 2003, or even the 79-day Umbrella Movement.

The fight for genuine universal suffrage aims to achieve the political rights that Hong Kong people have longed for. Some may believe such rights could be implemented gradually, yet Article 23 is widely seen as an immediate threat to our treasured personal freedoms. Therefore a violent struggle is likely should the government force the article onto the citizens. If it was proposed by someone like CY Leung, then Hong Kong people would put up a fight. 

Without the backing of a universal suffrage, any chief executive could not possibly implement Article 23 in Hong Kong. No Hong Kong citizen would ever trust a chief executive chosen through anything less than genuine democracy to implement the article. Yet, to Beijing, without Article 23, there can be no universal suffrage; to Hong Kong, if there is no true universal suffrage, then there cannot be Article 23. 

I have previously proposed implementing the article in stages. This could include formulating the less controversial “treason” clauses as a sign of goodwill to Beijing. In return, Hong Kong could persuade Beijing to allow them to exercise a fair election. But judging from the current situation, this may be easier said than done – the mutual trust is at its lowest point since 2003.

With LegCo’s veto of the second round of consultation imminent, it seems a viable solution to break the Article 23 and universal suffrage deadlock, which will have to be done by the next chief executive, and only if CY Leung is not re-elected.

In no circumstances does Leung have the drive or the capability to deliver any breakthrough. Therefore I have no faith in Leung delivering any solution within the two years left of his term. Only through a dismissal, like Leung’s predecessor Tung Chee-hwa, could this clock tick faster.

The deadlock between Article 23 and genuine universal suffrage cannot be solved individually. In order for a breakthrough, we must address them together. My suggestion is to simultaneously compile, discuss, and implement Article 23 and a fair method of universal suffrage.

After the imminent veto of the consultation, the next chief executive will be elected by the Election Committee. If Beijing genuinely intends for there to be a breakthrough, their next-in-line leader for Hong Kong cannot be someone strongly disapproved by over half of the population. Choosing someone similar to Donald Tsang would be their most viable option at this stage. 

The chief-executive-elect could announce that, within his or her term, the implementation of Article 23 and the consultation on the election method. The Article 23 implementation would not be in effect immediately after being passed by the Legislative Council. Instead, it would come into effect on July 1, 2022, under a truly popularly elected chief executive. Of course, the intended five-stage consultation on the election method would still happen.

When the chief executive is chosen through a popular vote, then Article 23 would be ready, and Beijing would have no concern about national security. Hong Kong citizens would also need not be concerned whether the article was enforced by a popularly elected chief executive, as passing of Article 23 legislation would only happen subsequently.

The two major hurdles in Hong Kong politics – Article 23 and universal suffrage – need to be solved, and trust needs to be rebuilt in our torn society. The feasibility of my proposal remains dependent on the basic willingness from all parties to solve the issues.

If that is absent, the differences across and within our borders will remain difficult to solve. Otherwise, the means and spirit of this proposal could be used for other public disputes across and within our borders.

Benny Tai Yiu-ting
Associate Professor HKU, LL.B. (HK), P.C.LL (HK), LL.M. (Lond)
Organiser of Occupy Central


Photo: Laurel Chor



Reader Interactions

Leave A Reply


BECOME A COCO+ MEMBER

Support local news and join a community of like-minded
“Coconauts” across Southeast Asia and Hong Kong.

Join Now
Coconuts TV
Our latest and greatest original videos
Subscribe on