|
A chief executive taking up the remainder of the term of his predecessor should not be considered as serving his first term, local political figures said yesterday.
Tsang Hin-chi, a standing committee member of the National People's Congress, said that such an arrangement would create confusion.
The length of a successor's tenure is a simple matter that can be settled by abiding by the legislative intent of the Basic Law, he said. There must not be prolonged dispute over the issue. Tsang said he would raise the issue at an NPC standing committee meeting next month.
Chan Wing-kee, a standing committee member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, opined that if the remainder of an unfinished CE term is less than half of the five-year term, the succeeding CE could be re-elected twice, meaning that he could serve for more than ten years.
However, he felt that the matter would better be resolved by the NPCSC through an interpretation of the Basic Law. "Since there are so many things unclear, the Hong Kong government might as well request the central government to give its interpretation of the Basic Law. (Making the request) before the NPCSC starts its session is most ideal," he said.
Secretary for Constitutional Affair Stephen Lam said yesterday the SAR government has been in contact with the central authorities over the issue.
Maria Tam, an NPC deputy and member of the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee, said that the by-election must be held on July 10 as scheduled, and the only thing that can ensure it happens is the NPCSC's interpretation of the Basic Law.
"But it is not the right time yet for the interpretation," she added.
They spoke in response to a signed article published by Ming Pao Daily News yesterday on the new CE's tenure.
Wang Zhenmin, associate dean of law of Tsinghua University, said in the article that Article 46 of the Basic Law actually refers to two different concepts -- the post of CE and the holder of the position.
The provision reads: "The term of office of the CE of the HKSAR shall be five years. He or she may serve for not more than two consecutive terms."
Wang argued that the first sentence means that one term of the office of CE should be exactly five years. Once the term is over, the holder of the post must be changed. And there is no limitation as to how many CEs could serve within that five years.
The second sentence, however, refers to the office-holder himself. He can only be re-elected once, even if his first term is the remainder of his predecessor's. Wang attributed the misunderstanding shared among some members of the local legal circle to the confusion between a post and its holder in British tradition.
In the Article 46's Chinese version, there is only one sentence because in Chinese the same term refers to both the office and the person. Since the position of chief executive was created by Chinese laws, the issue over its tenure must be viewed from the mainland legal angle, he explained.
(China Daily HK Edition March 31, 2005)
|
