.

Read in Chinese 

Speakers:

Wang Zhenmin, professor in the School of Law and director of the Center for Hong Kong and Macao Studies at Tsinghua University, and deputy head of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies

Han Dayuan, professor in the Law School at Renmin University of China, and member of the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress

Zhi Zhenfeng, researcher with the Institute of Law and the Center for Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Chairperson:

Shou Xiaoli, deputy director general of the Press Bureau of the State Council Information Office (SCIO) and SCIO spokesperson

Date:

Dec. 27, 2021

Shou Xiaoli:

Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. Welcome to this press briefing being held by the State Council Information Office (SCIO). Recently, the SCIO has issued a new white paper titled "Hong Kong: Democratic Progress Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems." Today, we are very glad to have invited three experts to introduce relevant information and answer your questions. They are Mr. Wang Zhenmin, professor in the School of Law and director of the Center for Hong Kong and Macao Studies at Tsinghua University, and deputy head of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies; Mr. Han Dayuan, professor in the Law School at Renmin University of China, and member of the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC); and Mr. Zhi Zhenfeng, researcher with the Institute of Law and the Center for Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

Now, I will give the floor to Mr. Wang Zhenmin.

Wang Zhenmin:

Friends from the media, ladies and gentlemen, good morning. I am very glad to be here at today's press briefing. The word "press briefing" is "chuifeng" in Mandarin, similar to "chuishui" in Cantonese. "Chuifeng" and "chuishui" can be combined into "chui feng shui," which implies that we have good feng shui. This March, the NPC and its standing committee improved Hong Kong's electoral system and formed a new democratic electoral system. Under the new system, the subsector general election for the Hong Kong Election Committee and the election of the seventh-term Legislative Council (LegCo) were held this year. On the day after the LegCo election, the SCIO issued a white paper titled "Hong Kong: Democratic Progress Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems." The other two speakers and I have studied the Hong Kong question for a long time. Many experts and scholars studying the development of Hong Kong's political system have carefully read this white paper. It's my great pleasure to have the opportunity today to share with you our understanding of the white paper and relevant questions, and exchange views with you on Hong Kong's democratic progress.

The white paper, which focuses on Hong Kong's democratic progress, is the second to be issued by the Chinese government on the Hong Kong question. It comes at an opportune time and has great significance and far-reaching impact. The document offers a panoramic overview of the development of Hong Kong's political system over the past 180 years since British troops occupied Hong Kong Island in 1841, and particularly over the past 40 years. Full of facts and reasoning, the white paper presents both narration and comments, and combines explanation and argumentation. The document organically connects many seemingly isolated historical events and stories, and clarifies the historical and logical threads running through them, thus enabling readers to temporarily put aside current affairs at the time and review the extremely bumpy and complicated development process of Hong Kong's political system from a historical viewpoint. The white paper helps uncover the thick layers of history and dispel the long-lingering clouds of lies and rumors, so that readers can find the essence through phenomena, and grasp the truth and the whole picture of events. I believe that the document will truly help the public understand the merits of relevant matters, and make more objective, fair and fact-based judgments on Hong Kong's democratic progress under the framework of One Country, Two Systems. The white paper tackles problems at their roots, reveals the truth, and differentiates right from wrong, thus giving people inspiration and confidence.

In preparation for today's conference, I talked to some Hong Kong youth who are living in Beijing, asking them about their views on the white paper. Some of my Hong Kong friends also called me to share their ideas. It can be said that they have the best say in this regard. They said that in the past, they felt Britain was so good, as Britain and the United States were more democratic and seemed to be helping Hong Kong. After reading the white paper, they understand that the colonial rule was, in essence, dictatorship and had nothing to do with democracy. Over a long period, Britain hadn't exercised democratic rule in Hong Kong. But the British government rushed to "develop democracy" in Hong Kong in the very short remaining period of the colonial rule. What was the intention? Whose benefit was it for? The purpose was obvious to everyone and could deceive nobody. The white paper has revealed their hidden story. Those who didn't exercise democracy now in turn blame those who develop democracy, finding fault with the latter's practice. Is that logic? Certain countries have always taken the Sino-British Joint Declaration as a tool to meddle in Hong Kong affairs. I bring the text of the joint declaration with me. After repeatedly reading the text, I can't find wording such as "democracy" or "universal suffrage." China has been criticized for violating the joint declaration. But there's no mention of universal suffrage or democracy in the joint declaration. The joint declaration is not a document determining what electoral system would be implemented and what kind of democracy would be practiced in Hong Kong after its return to the motherland. It only specified that the government of the United Kingdom would restore Hong Kong to China, as simple as that. After the handover, what political system and electoral system would be implemented in Hong Kong are purely China's internal affairs. No country will discuss with other countries what kind of political system or what kind of electoral system would be implemented. I also read the Hong Kong Letters Patent and Hong Kong Royal Instructions promulgated during British rule and couldn't find anything relevant to democracy. We can find in those two documents that the LegCo members were appointed or removed by the governor with the approval of the British government and should hold their offices at the authority's pleasure. How could that be democracy? The system of democracy in Hong Kong was established after its return to the motherland in accordance with China's Constitution and the Basic Law of the HKSAR. That's the fact and truth. If you are interested, you may study the above-mentioned documents related to Hong Kong.

Even if in terms of human rights and the rule of law, the relevant situation is much better in Hong Kong after its return than in those countries which point the finger at it. Hong Kong ranks higher than those countries on the rankings of democracy and the rule of law. Their blames totally fly in the face of facts. The white paper reveals where Hong Kong's democracy comes from and the path it's heading for as well as its development process. It also reveals who had undermined democracy and who saved it; who has created, promoted, restored, and defended Hong Kong's democracy, while who has undermined and disrupted democracy in Hong Kong. The Communist Party of China (CPC), the Chinese government, and the Chinese people, including 7.5 million Hong Kong residents, hold 100% of intellectual property right on Hong Kong's democracy. The white paper also discloses what democratic system is good and what is fake democracy that impairs Hong Kong. What has happened proves that the Western model doesn't work in Hong Kong, and Hong Kong must have its own democratic system under the framework of One Country, Two Systems. The white paper also gives answers to what such a democracy should look like, what environment and conditions are needed to develop it, what's Hong Kong's democracy after improving its electoral system, and what is Hong Kong's future.

Only after reading the white paper can we realize that Hong Kong's democracy is so open and inclusive. Permanent residents of the HKSAR who are not of Chinese nationality also enjoy the right to vote and the right to stand for election, which I think is unique in the world – just think which country or place allows foreigners to vote and be elected in its territory. Chinese citizens who are permanent residents of the HKSAR even have dual rights: the right to participate in the governance of both Hong Kong and the country as empowered by law. Under the One Country, Two Systems policy, Hong Kong treats foreign companies and individuals friendly and as equals. Hong Kong is the place in the world with the least discrimination against foreign investment and the highest degree of equal protection for investors' interests. China supports Hong Kong's integration into the overall national development and vigorously backs Hong Kong in exchanges and cooperation with other countries, and Hong Kong will be more open to the world. 

Not until we read the white paper can we be aware of the central authorities' unwavering commitment to the One Country, Two Systems principle, with great resolve, confidence, and patience remaining unchanged. This is also true for the central authorities' motherly trust in the Hong Kong people, including the youth. There was a time when the One Country, Two Systems policy was severely disrupted and distorted, and the Hong Kong people fretted that the central authorities would be irritated to change its policy towards Hong Kong. Now, the white paper makes it clear that the central authorities will continue to implement the basic policy of One Country, Two Systems fully and faithfully. The One Country, Two Systems principle is back on track and functions well with vitality, debunking various kinds of lies and rumors. 

The white paper shows us who Hong Kong's family is and who truly loves Hong Kong and cares about the suffering of every person in Hong Kong. The affectionate words in the white paper reflect the motherland's selfless love and intense expectations. In the past two years, everything the central authorities have done is to save Hong Kong and its youth, democracy, and the One Country, Two Systems principle; everything has been for the benefit of Hong Kong and served the fundamental interests of all people who regard Hong Kong as their home. Always remember, rich or poor, diseased or healthy, in good times or in bad times, the motherland will always be with Hong Kong and provide the strongest backing. There were once many misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the motherland. In fact, only the motherland sincerely loves and protects Hong Kong, and has been providing it with practical and substantial support, making copious endeavors to promote its democratic and economic development. In order to ensure the long-term implementation of the One Country, Two Systems principle, the motherland has struggled against the anti-China agitators extensively, an effort, however, that was always distorted and smeared. How hard for the motherland! 

The white paper explains that only by standing firmly with its family and motherland can Hong Kong have a bright future, prosperity, and real high-quality democracy. The Western politicians hypocritically declared that they would "stand with Hong Kong people." However, young people from Hong Kong responded by saying "forget it" and "stay away from me." They will never fall for it again, nor will they be fooled again to let others actualize "mutual destruction" at their home of Hong Kong and exploit Hong Kong to mess up the happy life of over 1.4 billion Chinese people.  

In a nutshell, only after reading the white paper will we recognize the great significance of the recent LegCo election, which has opened a brand-new chapter for Hong Kong's democracy, with its advanced nature and strengths beyond doubt. Hong Kong must resolutely follow its own path and establish a new capitalist democratic system under the One Country, Two Systems principle.  

Now, we would like to take your questions. Thank you.

Shou Xiaoli: 

Thank you, Mr. Wang, for your introduction. Now the floor is open for questions. Please identify the news outlet you work for before raising questions.

CCTV:

The white paper is titled "Hong Kong: Democratic Progress Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems." What's the relation between the One Country, Two Systems policy and Hong Kong's democratic development? Thank you. 

Han Dayuan:

The title of this white paper, which was just mentioned, is worth your full attention. The core idea of a white paper is reflected in its title. This white paper is entitled Hong Kong: Democratic Progress Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems. As we know, the word "under" signifies that the One Country, Two Systems framework and Hong Kong's democratic progress are not parallel. Rather, the framework constitutes the premise of and fundamental guarantee for Hong Kong's democratic progress, and One Country is a prerequisite for Hong Kong's democracy. The political system of Hong Kong applies locally. The election held in Hong Kong under the framework of One Country, Two Systems is a local one. The word "under" in the title helps clarify many fundamental and underlying problems. The white paper has pointed out clearly that the principle of One Country, Two Systems provides the fundamental guarantee for the development of democracy in Hong Kong. How should we understand this "fundamental guarantee"? Actually, it has shown the relationship between One Country and Two Systems. One Country is the prerequisite and basis for the Two Systems. The Two Systems are subordinate to and derive from One Country, and are an inherent part of One Country. The socialist system practiced on the mainland, the main body of the country, and the capitalist system in Hong Kong, run in parallel. However, the fact that the latter is subordinate to the former is not to be challenged. According to the white paper, the leadership by the CPC is the defining feature of Chinese socialism, and it is at the core of the order established by the Constitution. As such, it must be truly respected and upheld in Hong Kong. To determine the system of democracy in Hong Kong reflects the nature of the relationship between the central authorities and the HKSAR, and affects the region's stability and prosperity. In accordance with the Constitution and the HKSAR Basic Law, the central authorities have the final say in steering the development of democracy in Hong Kong. Only under central guidance can Hong Kong expect its democracy to make healthy progress. 

Some may be interested in the relationship between China's democracy and the democracy practiced in the HKSAR. In fact, the white paper has given clear answers in this regard. In accordance with the Constitution and the Basic Law, the system of democracy in Hong Kong is a component of the national democracy of the People's Republic of China, as Hong Kong's return to China signifies the region's reintegration into China's national governance. With the establishment of the constitutional order in Hong Kong, the system of democracy in the region has been reintegrated into the constitutional order underpinned by the Constitution and the Basic Law. Therefore, the system of democracy in Hong Kong is part of the national democracy. Both of them reflect the same philosophy, which is that the Chinese people, including the 7.5 million Hong Kong compatriots, run their own country. In the meantime, the state has, through the Basic Law, stipulated the main content, procedures, and basic principles of the system of democracy in the HKSAR. Thanks to the policy of One Country, Two Systems, Hong Kong can develop its democratic system with its own characteristics in accordance with the law and in light of the region's actual conditions, a system that applies locally and is different from that of the mainland.

According to the white paper, China's state and political systems determined that Hong Kong would establish a system of democracy after its return to China. The Chinese government remains committed to developing democracy in the HKSAR. As a special administrative region directly under the Central People's Government, its government should be organized on the basis of democratic principles stipulated by the Constitution and the Basic Law, as are its functions. The white paper also clarifies the interplay between the development of democracy and the rule of law in Hong Kong. The development of democracy should be based on the rule of law, and the constitutional order determined by the Constitution and the Basic Law should be upheld. As we all know, no democratic system in the world can be free of any checks. Democracy must be run under the framework of the rule of law. The development of democracy in Hong Kong cannot break the limits of the Constitution and the Basic Law, let alone undermine China's national security. Without national security, there would be no prospect of implementing democracy. Democracy, freedom, and human rights are the common values of humanity, to which the CPC and the Chinese people remain committed. Democracy is the right of the people, not the patent held by a small number of countries. The white paper – China: Democracy That Works – recently released by the Chinese government has encapsulated China's achievements in the development of democracy and championed the new concept of "whole-process people's democracy." This has provided Chinese thoughts, wisdom, and experience for global democracy laid the groundwork for developing democracy in Hong Kong under the framework of One Country, Two Systems, and provided a rule-of-law guarantee for developing democracy with Hong Kong's characteristics.

Therefore, Hong Kong citizens need to understand and pay attention to our country's democratic progress. Through practice, especially after experiencing turmoil in 2019, we have realized the limitation of the Western democracy and decided to firmly advance democracy with Hong Kong characteristics under the policy of One Country, Two Systems. 

Hong Kong Sing Tao Daily: 

The release of the white paper coincides with the first day after the Hong Kong LegCo election. May I ask what the considerations were in choosing the timing of its release? Thank you.

Wang Zhenmin:

As for the timing for the release of the white paper, there are many comments. In my view, two elements are of much concern to its debut soon after the LegCo election. First, the new electoral system of Hong Kong has twice experienced test practices: one with the elections of the Election Committee and the other with the LegCo. It is timely to summarize the new electoral system of Hong Kong. After all, the two significant practices have proved that it's a good system. The only test for truth is practice. We speak with facts. It's a good time to summarize the new electoral system in the HKSAR and its practical experience, elaborate on the core principles of the new electoral system and democracy, make a panoramic scanning of the democratic progress of Hong Kong, and extract the experience, lessons, and basic rules. I think it's appropriate. Second, some Western countries and politicians always observe China and everything in Hong Kong with self-imposed bias and resort to all kinds of means to attack and smear democracy in Hong Kong. The release of the white paper is timely to clarify facts, uncover the truth, fight against the attack on the democracy and new electoral system of the HKSAR, and manifest the principles and position of the Chinese government on the democratic progress of Hong Kong. I think the timing is very appropriate. Thank you. 

Hong Kong Commercial Daily: 

With the implementation of the Hong Kong National Security Law and the improvement of the electoral system, the situation of Hong Kong patriots governing Hong Kong has become consolidated. My question is for the experts: how will the government of HKSAR improve the business environment and accelerate the development of Hong Kong? Thank you.

Zhi Zhenfeng:

A good business environment is the hallmark of Hong Kong. In fact, the policy of One Country, Two Systems is the fundamental guarantee for the business environment in Hong Kong. People around the world are concerned with the business environment in Hong Kong. Being an international financial, shipping, and trade center, Hong Kong is a bridge of China for international communication and an attractive place for foreign investment. The Chinese government always firmly supports the government of HKSAR to improve the business environment of Hong Kong and protect the interests of investors. 

The rule of law underpins the best business environment. Since the return of Hong Kong to China, we have noticed that the business environment in Hong Kong continues to improve and is in a leading global position. The policy of One Country, Two Systems guarantees democracy and the rule of law in Hong Kong. According to the World Bank's Doing Business reports, Hong Kong is always at the forefront of various indicators. Why? The reason is that the high level of the rule of law ensures a good business environment. The policy of One Country, Two Systems has been successfully practiced in Hong Kong. Hong Kong now enjoys a stable political situation, good order, effective governance, high-level rule of law, a buoyant market economy, and an amiable business environment. 

Anti-China forces both inside and outside the region are saboteurs of Hong Kong's business environment. In recent years, anti-China agitators in Hong Kong and foreign territories have been trying to undermine the rule of law in Hong Kong, causing serious social damage, confrontation and conflict, and harming Hong Kong's business environment. We can see that foreign countries such as the U.K. and the United States continue to smear, suppress and bad-mouth Hong Kong. In June last year, the United States ended its special treatment of Hong Kong. In April this year, U.S. Secretary of State Blinken reaffirmed the cancellation of U.S. perks for Hong Kong's autonomous trade and finance. In July, the U.S. trumped up business warnings regarding Hong Kong to directly intimidate enterprises and individuals in Hong Kong, and even imposed illegal so-called sanctions on HKSAR and mainland officials. Within Hong Kong, anti-China agitators launched an illegal "Occupy Central" movement in 2014, later especially during the 2019 turmoil, they obstructed traffic, destroyed facilities, set fires, smashed shops, looted amid the chaos, attacked people, and even privately manufactured arms and weapons, and occupied universities. For a period of time, they turned Hong Kong from one of the world's safest cities into a turbulent city, which caused investors to lose their sense of security and discouraged tourists from visiting.

At critical moments, the central authority is the strongest backing for safeguarding Hong Kong's business environment. With the introduction of a series of measures by the state to address both the symptoms and root causes, such as the enforcement of the Hong Kong National Security Law and the improvements to the electoral system of Hong Kong, relying on the strong support of the central authorities and the vast development hinterland of the Greater Bay Area, Hong Kong's society has gone from chaos to stability, the business environment has been continuously optimized, and the economy has rebounded rapidly, providing huge market space for foreign investors. Here are some examples and data: In 2020, Hong Kong's IPO funds raised exceeded HK$500 billion, an increase of more than 50% year on year, allowing it to remain the second largest IPO market in the world. A recent report issued by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) also reaffirmed Hong Kong's status as an international center. Hong Kong ranks as the sixth largest trading entity in goods in the world in terms of the total value of trade in goods. According to a report by the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development, Hong Kong ranks as the third largest destination for foreign direct investment in the world. And, in the latest 2021 World Digital Competitiveness Ranking, Hong Kong ranks first in Asia and second in the world.

The HKSAR government is very clear and understands that financial trade and commerce are important pillars of Hong Kong's economic prosperity. The principle of Hong Kong patriots governing Hong Kong can guarantee a better business environment in Hong Kong. The HKSAR is now entering a new stage of restored order, thriving society and further prosperity. Therefore, the HKSAR government must seize the development opportunities brought about by the country's comprehensive deepening of reform and opening-up, actively participate in the significant national construction strategies such as building the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area and the Belt and Road Initiative, accelerate integration into the overall national development, inject new momentum into Hong Kong's economic development, work hard to resolve various deep-seated problems that have plagued Hong Kong for a long time, and further optimize and enhance the business environment. Thank you.

Bloomberg News:

Can we ask, is there a timeline for the universal suffrage for the chief executive? Thank you.

Wang Zhenmin:

Allow me to first discuss some points of view. The white paper reiterated the principle and position on the issue of democratic development in Hong Kong. The goals of dual universal suffrage laid down in the Basic Law of the HKSAR have not changed. Future amendments to the two methods for the elections of the chief executive and the LegCo will still be in accordance with the Constitution and the Basic Law of HKSAR, especially the newly revised Basic Law Annex I and Annex II, and will proceed from the realities of Hong Kong. Over the years, the central government has spent a lot of time, energy and resources on the democratic development of Hong Kong. Hong Kong's society has also made tremendous efforts in this regard, which has even caused serious political turmoil. The economy and people's livelihoods were interfered with because of politics. Now that we have a good democratic election system, it can be said that it has not come easily. We have all paid high prices in exchange for today's new democratic system. I think it should be cherished and consolidated. After such a long period of social turbulence and turmoil in Hong Kong, my own feeling is that people are longing for stability, it is necessary to allow the society to recuperate, and spend more energy and resources on developing the economy, improving people's livelihoods, and creating better lives, so as to lay a solid economic and social foundation for the healthy development of Hong Kong's democracy. I think this is what the residents of Hong Kong expect.

The white paper also reiterated in the first section of Part VI the central government's basic policies for Hong Kong. This section clearly states that we must continue to abide by a set of key principles: One Country, Two Systems, Hong Kong governed by the people of Hong Kong, and a high degree of autonomy for the region; and make sure that the policy of One Country, Two Systems will remain unchanged and that it is implemented faithfully. This is the fundamental guarantee for the development of democracy in the HKSAR. More specifically, in recent years, we've often heard about the notion of promoting HK's integration into national development, however, it is important to note that the white paper clearly points out the Chinese government supports Hong Kong in extensive exchanges and cooperation with other countries and areas, and attaches great importance to protecting the legitimate interests of foreign investors in Hong Kong. Hong Kong belongs to China, yet it is also an international economic, trade and financial platform, a platform benefiting not only China but also other countries in the world. Therefore, China is willing to share this platform with other countries and share the dividends brought by China's development. For many years, many international assessment agencies have believed that Hong Kong was, is, and will be the world's freest, friendliest, most open, and most dynamic free port and international financial center. This will only be strengthened and will not be changed. Thanks.

China Daily:

The white paper mentions that having Hong Kong patriots govern Hong Kong does not exclude people with different political views or ideas, nor will criticism of the government be suppressed. Democracy in the HKSAR allows ample room for different opinions and political groups, and there will be a plurality of voices in the government. All those who love the country and Hong Kong should stand together to form the most extensive united front, and expand it and make it more inclusive under the framework of One Country, Two Systems. The head of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of China's State Council also pointed out earlier that there was a diverse range of candidates for the LegCo election. Did the recently concluded LegCo election reflect this nature? Thanks.

Han Dayuan:

Thank you for your question. Since the changes and improvements were made to Hong Kong's electoral system, a total of 90 LegCo members have been elected. People are very concerned about how political inclusion is manifested. Among the questions of concern, I found that political inclusion and diversity of the electoral system are the terms that appear most frequently. As a scholar, I have some thoughts to share with you in this regard.

First of all, we must set a basic premise when talking about political inclusion, as I have mentioned earlier. The name of this white paper is "Hong Kong: Democratic Progress Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems." The policy of One Country, Two Systems itself is one of China's greatest and most unique contributions to the political civilization of mankind. Its essence lies in the peaceful coexistence of two distinct systems within a sovereign country, each exerting respective advantages within the scope of a country. Therefore, the establishment and development of this system itself embodies the greatest political inclusion and greatest political courage, which is also one of China's contributions to world civilization. We have seen that though some countries or politicians criticize China's policy of One Country, Two Systems, they all recognize its contribution. In the history of human political civilization over the past 100 years, we cannot find similar institutional arrangements. In the socialist country of China, the policy of One Country, Two Systems is used to solve problems leftover from history. The political inclusion is embodied in the commitment and basic philosophy of China's government to the principle of One Country, Two Systems. The democratic development of Hong Kong under the policy of One Country, Two Systems, including the reform of the electoral system, reflects the greatest political inclusion, which in itself demonstrates the philosophy of the policy of One Country, Two Systems.

The white paper emphasized the inclusiveness and diversity of democracy in many aspects. Notably, it highlighted how to ensure the inclusiveness of the election. For example, the white paper summarized four characteristics of the electoral system. First, it is broadly representative. The electoral system has attracted an impressive range of candidates from diverse backgrounds, which shows its diversity. Second, it is politically inclusive. Candidates for the LegCo, from different points on the political spectrum, are all equal, no matter what political philosophies and opinions they hold. It's normal that they have different political views or opinions. Hong Kong patriots governing Hong Kong is the fundamental principle for improving the region's electoral system and the foundation for promoting its democratic progress. Hong Kong patriots must govern Hong Kong, but this principle doesn't mean disallowing different voices. Any Hong Kong residents can stand for election and participate in governing Hong Kong in accordance with the law, as long as they love the country and Hong Kong and are not involved in activities that undermine national sovereignty, security, and development interests or jeopardize Hong Kong's prosperity and stability. Therefore, it does not exclude people with different political views or ideas, nor will criticism of the government be suppressed, as said by some Western countries. Political inclusiveness and diversity are essential to implementing the principle of Hong Kong patriots governing Hong Kong. As you know, Hong Kong itself is a diverse society. Usually, people hold different views, opinions, or even sharp criticisms concerning the formulation of public policies and laws and significant issues. However, the Basic Law stipulates that Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, press, assembly, and procession. These are all fundamental rights and freedoms safeguarded by the Basic Law. Hence, the central government clarifies that no instigator of disorder should be allowed into the governing body of the HKSAR, which doesn't mean that no other voices are allowed in the LegCo. During this election, 153 candidates were vying for 90 LegCo seats, which indicates that the electoral system is broadly representative and ensures balanced participation. From the perspective of social background, these LegCo members include clergy, school principals, university professors, lawyers, doctors, and community workers, and such broad representation reflects political inclusiveness and diversity. Among the 90 LegCo members, 56 are new faces, accounting for 62% of the total. Hopefully, you will notice an essential idea in the white paper: All those who love the country and Hong Kong should stand together to form the most extensive united front, expand it, and make it more inclusive under the One Country, Two Systems framework. The extensive united front means that we do not differentiate between political groups based on their political views, backgrounds, or ideas; our sole criterion is to see who serves the people of Hong Kong and safeguards the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong. In this way, we have formed a consensus among Hong Kong society to the most significant extent.

As a scholar, I would especially like to emphasize that since Hong Kong's return to China, since 2005 in particular, some regular expressions took shape in Hong Kong society, such as "pro-establishment camp," "opposition camp," and "pro-democracy camp." Democracy is a very noble and great term. It is understandable to form such habitual expressions as the "pro-democracy camp" label at times, or other labels, in a certain period after its return, but such a phrase, or a way of thinking, cannot objectively demonstrate the diverse interests in Hong Kong society, and is not beneficial for building a diverse and inclusive political and cultural atmosphere. It is apt to, by labeling people who love the country and Hong Kong but hold different political views, artificially divide patriotic people into various factions, which I think is not conducive to uniting people from all sectors of society or building social consensus. The white paper emphasizes forming the most extensive united front under One Country, Two Systems. I believe it is a very important concept because the core of democracy lies in enhancing people's sense of identity and gaining in system implementation. The key to the issue lies in how LegCo members genuinely serve the people after the election. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the anti-extradition turmoil, Hong Kong society, especially the Hong Kong people, faces many challenges and issues concerning livelihood, such as housing and employment, which are expected to be addressed through the new LegCo. In my view, being elected to the LegCo is just an exam admission ticket given by the Hong Kong people, and it remains to be seen whether the 90 members elected will genuinely serve the Hong Kong people in the next four years and whether they will be able to obtain their "graduation certificates." The Hong Kong people are in the best position to say whether or not to give them the "graduation certificates," and I particularly look forward to seeing them respond to the most urgent expectations of the Hong Kong people after being sworn in. Thank you.

Kyodo News:

It is reported that the voter turnout in this Hong Kong LegCo election was a record low. Some European and American organizations, therefore, criticized it as unrepresentative. What is the comment on the Chinese side? Thank you.

Han Dayuan:

As a professor of constitutional law, I also study electoral law. The question brought up by the Japanese journalist is also what you all pay great attention to. After the election, I often heard some friends, including some foreign friends, discuss about the voter turnout. The question you raised is of wide attention, and there are also some analyses in Hong Kong society. I would like to share my observations and opinions just as a scholar.

To interpret the voter turnout, we should take an objective and comprehensive look at the election results. According to statistics, in this LegCo election, the voter turnout was 30.2% in geographical constituencies, 32.22% in functional constituencies, and 98.48% in the Election Committee constituency. The election is divided into three parts: geographical constituency election, functional constituency election, and Election Committee election. Therefore, to evaluate the election results, we should not just look at any one of the three election types but take a comprehensive view. That's my first basic idea.

Second, according to my understanding of the rule of law and democratic theory and some views from the international community, turnout is not directly equal to democracy, and the turnout figures do not necessarily indicate the level of democracy and legitimacy of elections. To directly link turnout with democracy and legitimacy or equate turnout with democracy and legitimacy, in my opinion, is at least not in accordance with the rule of law and democratic theory. We should not take turnout as the sole criterion when we observe the election results. Turnout matters because it is an expression of voters' free will, but it is not the only one. We only use it as one of the indicators of voters' engagement in the expression of political intention. We should not only look at how many people have voted, but also who the elected are, and whether they can serve every sector of society, the development of society, and especially the interests of Hong Kong as a whole and its people. As I said earlier, the elections in Hong Kong are local. As we have observed, in recent years, local elections in some Western countries have seen different levels of voter turnout. For example, the turnout in local elections in cities like New York and Los Angeles was sometimes only around 20%, and that of London Assembly elections was between 30% and 40%, which also varies. I have done some research on it. The voter turnout in this year's Tokyo metropolitan assembly election was around 42%, and that in the European Parliament elections was about 20%. Therefore, the voter turnout in different countries and regions is affected by a combination of factors, so we should not just look at the turnout.

Besides, the reform of the electoral system this time, from designing to practical implementation, was under a tight schedule, as the central government had to make a general plan, and the HKSAR needed to implement the plan well. Therefore, all involved parties needed time to adjust to and comprehend the new system. Notably, the electoral procedures and rules of the new system are indeed complex, so it is understandable that some voters are still getting familiar with the system or looking on. The key to the electoral system lies in its inclusiveness and balance. Given that the reform was carried out against the backdrop of the disordered and chaotic HKSAR LegCo, we should fully respect voters as they take time to comprehend the transformation from an old electoral system to a new one. It is normal that some voters are looking on, and some might even be dissatisfied. We should show respect whether they voted or not and whoever they voted for. The common wish of the electorate is an orderly, prosperous, and steady Hong Kong. The voters will reach a consensus on the new electoral system over time. About the voter turnout this time, there are three points we need to make clear and hope you will notice. First, the Hong Kong elections in the past were highly politicalized, so there were more political issues and less issues about people's livelihood. The most significant change and highlight of the elections this time was that the candidates paid much attention to issues about people's livelihood and the economy. Therefore, the electoral culture is changing from an unhealthy one caused by political rifts in the past to one with people's livelihood as its core, which is a gradual process. Second, we noticed disruption from some anti-China forces from the West, including instigators of disorder in Hong Kong. For instance, some of those forces called for no voting, and some so-called poll organizations in Hong Kong disturbed the free choices of voters by polls. One more thing is that the meeting mechanism between Hong Kong's electorate and the candidates is flexible, but due to the pandemic, no more activities were arranged this time. Voter turnout is under the comprehensive influence of various factors, and we should take an objective and comprehensive approach to analyze it.  

Despite different views, the most significant success of the reform is the sound implementation of a good electoral system. Therefore, we should have objective evaluations. Thank you. 

Wang Zhenmin:

I want to add one point. I paid particular attention to the New York City elections last month, the voter turnout of which was 24%. NYC has a population of 8 million, while Hong Kong has a population of 7.5 million. The electorate of NYC is more than that of Hong Kong, but only 1.3 million people voted in the NYC elections, in contrast to the 1.35 million in the Hong Kong elections. Voter turnout is not the critical point. Besides, there is a phenomenon in the US that the voter turnouts of state-, city- and county-level elections are lower than that of the federal elections. However, many public opinion polls suggested that American people may trust local governments more. A survey indicates that voter turnout is like drawing blood, which is intended to examine if the body has problems, but you don't have to draw too much and one tube of blood is enough. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party severely struggle with each other on voter turnout. The Democratic Party wants to make it high, while the Republican Party wants to keep it low, believing if the Democratic Party has a high voter turnout, the Republican Party can never win. So, voter turnout in this case is not an issue truly reflecting democracy but an issue affecting election victory, which is the fundamental concern. Thank you. 

Phoenix TV:

We can see that the white paper covers a very long time span of 180 years from the colonial times to nowadays. Why does the white paper travel such a long time into the past and adopt a historical perspective? Thank you. 

Zhi Zhenfeng:

I will answer this question. The essence of the question is how democracy has been created and developed in Hong Kong. Though a basic fact, the answer has been distorted on purpose for a long time. There is a widespread hearsay or myth that the democracy in Hong Kong was bestowed and initiated by the British. It is truly a hearsay or rumor. To say that the British colonists bestowed democracy on Hong Kong is to fabricate a lie deliberately. Only by exposing the lie can we reveal the real picture from the very beginning. 

One of the important functions of the white paper is to help clarify facts and set the record straight. Over the years, the Hong Kong agitators have colluded with external anti-China forces to manipulate facts. As a result, many people, including some Hong Kong compatriots, have got a vague or even misinformed understanding of the origin and development of democracy in Hong Kong. This allowed anti-China agitators to foment considerable trouble. Over the years, they have confused truth and falsehood, instigated and abetted illegal activities, incited masked rioters to violence and caused social unrest. Again and again, democracy in Hong Kong was held back by them. History is the best textbook. Therefore, the white paper covers a long history in order to clarify historical facts and set the record straight.

The white paper presents basic facts about the origin and development of democracy in Hong Kong. On one hand, it exposes the lies fabricated by the U.S. and the U.K. about Hong Kong's democracy. During more than a century of British colonial rule, the U.K. had constantly undermined, disrupted and obstructed the development of democracy in Hong Kong. Simply put, under British colonial rule, there was no democracy in Hong Kong. As Alexander Grantham, the 22nd governor of Hong Kong appointed by the British government, wrote in his memoir, "In a crown colony the Governor is next to the Almighty." At the end of its colonial rule, the British government rushed through the so-called "electoral reform" in Hong Kong, which violated the Joint Declaration of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Question of Hong Kong (Sino-British Joint Declaration). It also violated the principle of aligning Hong Kong's future political system with the Basic Law, as well as previous agreements and understandings reached between the two sides. Known as the "Three Violations," these were imposed in Hong Kong against the basic rules of democratic development. Instead of bringing democracy to Hong Kong, its ulterior motives for doing so were to pervert the democratic system designed by the Basic Law and turn Hong Kong into a de facto independent or semi-independent political entity against the region's due constitutional status. The vicious intention of the U.K. was to undermine China's full governance over Hong Kong after the country resumed its sovereignty over the region, and extend British political influence after Hong Kong's return to China. In fact, this was part of a British attempt to portray their withdrawal as somehow "honorable" at the end of colonial rule.

On the other hand, the white paper says the CPC and the Chinese government designed, created, safeguarded and advanced Hong Kong's system of democracy. It makes clear where democracy in Hong Kong came from, that is, "the return of Hong Kong to China ushered in a new era for democracy." First, China's state system determined that Hong Kong would establish a system of democracy after its return to China. People's democracy is the life of socialism, a brilliant banner that has always been held high by the CPC, and an ideal that has always been cherished by the CPC and the Chinese people. Hence, Hong Kong would definitely establish a system of democracy after its return to China. Second, the central government has remained committed to the policy of One Country, Two Systems and to the Basic Law of the HKSAR, fully supporting the orderly development of democracy in Hong Kong in accordance with the law. Also, the central government has taken significant steps to advance democracy in Hong Kong, including giving the approval to amend election methods for the Chief Executive and the LegCo, setting a timetable for universal suffrage, drawing up a roadmap for electing the Chief Executive by universal suffrage and so on. In response to the obstruction and disruption by anti-China agitators and those external groups behind them, the central government has taken a series of decisive measures that addressed both the symptoms and root causes of the unrest to restore order to Hong Kong, bringing its democratic progress that underpins One Country, Two Systems back on track.

Therefore, we have reasons to believe that by gradually implementing the principle of Hong Kong patriots governing Hong Kong, combined with continued progress in promoting the new electoral system, Hong Kong's democratic development will steadily advance in accordance with the One Country, Two Systems principle and the realities in Hong Kong. To sum up, the future of Hong Kong's democracy is unlimited and bright. Thank you.

CRNTT: 

The white paper stressed that the system of democracy in Hong Kong should not be a replica of some other model. Rather, a path to democracy with Hong Kong characteristics should be explored under the policy of One Country, Two Systems, and the Basic Law and in keeping with its political, economic, social, cultural and historical conditions. So, what are the strengths of democracy with Hong Kong characteristics? Thank you. 

Wang Zhenmin: 

The revision and improvement of Hong Kong's electoral system have formed a new democratic system with many characteristics, highlights, and strengths, which mainly lie in the following aspects: 

First, it underlines both political security and political inclusiveness. All countries put safety first in their electoral systems. We have seen multiple countries, including the United States, saying that other countries interfered with their elections, and such interference should be opposed. Is there any country that doesn't resist foreign interference? Foreign intervention will deform democracy. Should that occur, democracy will be manipulated and distorted by certain external forces, and people cannot enjoy a democratic life. Why should we exclude anti-China elements who disrupt Hong Kong from participating in democratic life? The reason lies in that what they truly want is not democracy. Therefore, we should fully ensure election and political security, which are the most important. Under the new electoral system, all the candidates are patriotic and love Hong Kong. It is up to those who have built Hong Kong to discuss Hong Kong issues, not those who serve foreign forces to stir up trouble. The new electoral system also highlights political inclusiveness. To ensure security, we don't need to exclude democracy and political inclusiveness but external interference and disruption. Prof. Han has just talked about this point. In his recent speech, Xia Baolong, vice chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, also made an in-depth exposition on political inclusiveness. We only exclude those who are doing bad things and serving external forces. Hong Kong's local politics are diverse, and the political spectrum is vast. Those with ulterior motives were the only ones excluded. Therefore, the candidates and those elected are from various political groups across a broad spectrum. I think this is a very significant feature of the new electoral system. Developing the broadest possible united front under the framework of One Country, Two Systems is also a bright spot. During relevant discussions, it was proposed by many people that foreigners' right to vote be removed. There is no other place in the world like Hong Kong where foreigners can enjoy the right to vote and the right to stand for election with a "green card" (permanent resident status). But no change was made to this stipulation. Isn't this a manifestation of political inclusiveness?

Second, it guarantees democracy and competition. Some misunderstandings hint that the principle of "patriots administering Hong Kong" would stop competition, and candidates could win an easy victory. However, it turned out to be the first time in Hong Kong that an "easy victory" situation was eliminated. Everyone must compete fairly, and there is also full competition among patriots who love Hong Kong, so that Hong Kong people can vote under normal circumstances. The elections in the past were abnormal. Now democratic rights have been taken back from the anti-China politicians seeking to disrupt Hong Kong and returned to Hong Kong people to ensure they have the freedom to choose, truly become the masters, and live a democratic life of their own. Therefore, the competition is no less intense than in the past. All candidates competed on the same platform in the election, campaigning on their policies, experience, capability, patriotism, and love for Hong Kong. In the past elections, those who showed intention to disrupt Hong Kong and China at large would have a larger chance to win. That was abnormal. Patriotism is the prerequisite for elections in any country in the world. For example, in the elections in the United States, candidates who dare to say that they are not patriotic will be out of the race immediately. However, in the past elections in Hong Kong, candidates campaigned on who was more unpatriotic. In comparison, this year's elections are indeed normal elections, focusing on the economy and people's livelihood. This is what Hong Kong people care about. It is the politicians who care about politics. Hong Kong people are busy working every day and what they care about are the daily necessities of life. So, is it rational if the focus is only on solving the politicians' problems rather than on Hong Kong people? Therefore, the competition under the new electoral system is real and a regular competition instead of being political performance and manipulation.

Its third strength lies in its broad representation and balanced participation. Professor Han also talked about this point just now, so I will not elaborate on it anymore. The broad representation is exactly what the former electoral system ignored, such as representatives from grassroots and vulnerable communities. As Hong Kong is a capitalist society, there is no question about giving due regard to the interests of the business community and maintaining the sound development of capitalism in Hong Kong. However, you also have to give due regard and consideration to the groups that have been ignored for too long. This is a shortcoming of the previous electoral system, and we tackled it this time. It is noticeable that the new electoral system pays more attention to the overall and fundamental interests of Hong Kong. In the past, members from Hong Kong Island district councils could not represent Kowloon, nor could members from the legal sector represent the medical sector. They only represented the interests of their specific sectors, instead of the overall interests of Hong Kong. Now, however, we see that the 40 LegCo members returned by the Election Committee represent the overall interests of Hong Kong.

Moreover, the new electoral system has changed the conflicting political culture in the past Western-style democracy. The conflicts between the executive and legislative branches and the internal strife within the LegCo tore the whole of Hong Kong apart. Is that normal? Western-style democracy has come to an end in Hong Kong. It can't go any further. It is what Hong Kong imitated in the past. The elections this time have transformed the situation. There must be checks and balances and coordination between the executive and legislative branches. It can be expected that the new electoral system will bring good governance to Hong Kong with a more effective executive-led system, and significantly improve its governing capabilities. That's all.

Global Times: 

Following the LegCo election in Hong Kong, we noticed that the G7, the EU and the Five Eyes have all expressed their concerns and worries over the democratic development and electoral system in Hong Kong. They alleged that the new electoral system has undermined Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy under the policy of One Country, Two Systems, and that the central government shows no respect to the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong. What's your opinion on this? Thank you.

Wang Zhenmin:

I really have no idea what they are worried about. We make Hong Kong better. Is this what they are worried about? Doesn't everyone in Hong Kong and the mainland expect to make Hong Kong better? This is even what the world expects. People in Hong Kong, the mainland and the world at large all expect Hong Kong to get better. If there are worries over this, I think such worries are unnecessary and driven by ulterior motives.

For a long time, some politicians in the West have believed that there is only one model of democracy in the world, namely, the democracy they are practicing. They cannot allow any other models of democracy. However, as a matter of fact, they practice different models of democracy in the West. Is the democracy in Britain the same as that in the U.S. or in France? They are different. They have their own democratic and electoral systems. Why can't they allow Hong Kong to have its own democratic system? This resonates with what Mr. Deng Xiaoping said in the past, that the old colonial mentality and Western-centric theories are haunting them, reflecting their pride and prejudice.

The democratic development in Hong Kong has its own reality and conditions, and it needs to solve Hong Kong's problems. In judging Hong Kong's democracy, we cannot say it is good when it is similar to or the same as the democracy of some country, or bad when it is different. We should take into account whether Hong Kong's democratic system can solve the problems of the people of Hong Kong and if the system has its own logic and ground. It is itself violating democratic principles for those politicians to promote and impose Western-style democracy against the will of others. Why can't we run our own affairs and make our own decisions? Why do you want to choose a system of democracy for us? We are running our own affairs and do not need carping and irresponsible remarks from others. We are not making decisions for you, and we never interfere with what systems and models of democracy other countries choose.

Professor Han and I both study constitution-related issues. In the past, academia often portrayed Western democracy nicely. But over these years, seeing the reality, more and more people no longer admire or worship it. The West still thinks that they occupy the highland of global democracy, superior to all others, and they can point fingers at the democracy of other countries and regions. But things changed a long time ago. Serious problems have been adequately exposed in their democratic practices. Their system is hypocritical and dangerous, with deep-rooted downside, not perfect at all, which has been exposed in front of the world for a long time. These years, they have been facing severe failure in internal governance, becoming examples of failed democracy rather than examples of thriving democracy. In particular, after the presidential election in the United States last year, we saw the American public occupy Capitol Hill. That was a "Beautiful Sight to Behold." Of course, if similar incidents happen in other places, the United States will offer criticism, saying things are out of order in those places. But when it happened in the United States, they argued that their democracy was perfect. This showed typical "double standards." Such democracy and chaos are witnessed and disdained by people worldwide. But they still peddle it to other countries and regions. These years, we have seen them make all efforts to tout their democracy, and how is the result? We have seen disasters threaten places where their democratic system has been forced. We have seen tragedies, relentless wars, and broken families in those places. They are reflecting on and reforming such democracy themselves, then why do they want to sell it in Hong Kong and other places? It is increasingly clear that their democracy doesn't mean people being the masters of the country. Taking a serious look into it, I don't think they will let the people be the masters of the country, like what the U.S. Constitution says - "We the people…" Because in that way, capitalists will have nowhere to be. Can they let the "one person, one vote" system make the decisions? Not possible. Then who are the masters? The politicians, the capital, and the money. The people, though, are shrouded and beguiled by the noise of democracy. So, we wonder that, after how many U.S. governments will the issues of poverty, wealth gap, and deep-rooted racial discrimination be tackled in the country? In more than 200 years, have these issues been solved? Are things improving or getting worse? Of course, as democracy deepens, these problems should have been better tackled. But they are not solved but worsened, which means something is going wrong with the system. In the democratic systems of such countries, the reality is that politicians hold money in one hand and ballots in the other. Where are the people? Can you see the people? When elections take place, people are God. Politicians beg voters for their ballots. But where are the people when elections finish? No one knows. Is there anyone serving the people? There is a saying that, you cannot see beautiful spring days when your eyes are closed, and people won't be able to see the mud on your legs if you keep standing in the water. Two elections have shown how the new democratic electoral system works in Hong Kong, and I believe future practices will continue to testify to its effectiveness. This is a success of democracy, benefiting local people and improving their wellbeing. There is no more chaos, "black terror," attempts for "mutual destruction," and filibusters. There is no more betraying one's own country for personal gains. And there is no more acting against China and creating disturbances in Hong Kong. The central government and local people have the most significant say in such important issue as the democratic development in Hong Kong. It is not something for foreign politicians to make comments on. We shall firmly follow our political system. Thank you.

Hong Kong Ta Kung Wen Wei Media Group:

What roles will the white paper play in the education of Hong Kong's young people? What new insights can they obtain from the white paper? Thank you. 

Zhi Zhenfeng:

Those are really good questions. If the young people are strong, the country will be strong. Young people are the future of Hong Kong and the country, and the hope of the nation. Only by focusing on facts can we discern right from wrong. The history of Hong Kong's democratic progress is an important part of the history of Hong Kong's return to China. By reading the white paper, the origin and development of Hong Kong's democracy and the One Country, Two Systems policy can be understood, and the truth of history can be restored. This will teach Hong Kong's young people that the CPC and the Chinese government designed, created, safeguarded, and advanced Hong Kong's system of democracy and anti-China, destabilizing elements in Hong Kong are spoilers and saboteurs of Hong Kong democracy. The white paper will help Hong Kong youth gain a full understanding of the relationship between One Country and Two Systems and develop their accurate understanding of history so as to strengthen the education work concerning patriotism and national conditions. 

The white paper should be the antidote to fallacies. If you have a 13-year-old daughter, will you allow her to take to the streets to join demonstrations with those rioters who set fire, rampantly smash facilities, and commit robbery and physical assault? Do you agree with those so-called demonstrations? Will you feel relieved if your child is associated with those people? Meanwhile, since Hong Kong's return to China, anti-China, destabilizing forces in Hong Kong continue to promote the so-called "Umbrella Movement protests" and the 2019 turmoil. We can hardly imagine that those who promoted these ideas will love Hong Kong and uphold true democracy. It is impossible. Anti-China, destabilizing forces propagate terrorism in the guise of democracy, distort the real meaning of democracy and freedom, and poison young people's values to make them become victims of secessionist sentiment, black violence, and mutual destruction. So we must use the white paper as the antidote to clarify facts. 

In this context, the white paper should be a "textbook" for Hong Kong's young people. The white paper has sowed the seeds of the correct views of history and democracy in Hong Kong. As the masters of the country and Hong Kong, Hong Kong's young people will become more reasonable, increase in confidence, advocate morals, and proceed with determination by studying the white paper. The Hong Kong society can combine the contents of the white paper with national security education and national education in schools, compile textbooks, adolescence literature, and teacher's training programs based on the contents of the white paper. It can also work with local social organizations to carry out knowledge competitions to enhance the enthusiasm of young people to study the white paper. 

I think that Hong Kong's education, journalism, and literature and art sectors, especially those providing culture and entertainment products to young people, should all take action to help Hong Kong people, including the youth, to correctly understand the relationship between the One Country, Two Systems policy and Hong Kong's democracy, and create positive, healthy, quality works to realize the healthy development of democracy in Hong Kong and advance the democracy process in Hong Kong. Thank you. 

Han Dayuan:

I want to add something. As a university teacher, I am very concerned about the participation of young people in Hong Kong in this election system. As Professor Zhi said just now, I think the future of Hong Kong is closely related to every young person in Hong Kong. Therefore, it is crucial for the young generation in Hong Kong to care about the development of their country and the development of Hong Kong, including the political development. Young people are most concerned with housing, employment, and career growth opportunities. Therefore, to help them develop and grow, both the central government and the SAR government have provided a lot of policy support, including the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area development plan. As a university teacher, I maintain frequent contact with young people. As far as I know, the number of young people in Hong Kong who have visited the mainland is much less than I thought. I hope that relevant departments can take adequate measures to encourage more young people to come to the mainland themselves. I believe that coming out in person to see what the mainland is really like will make a difference. 

Western countries use democracy and human rights as a pretext for criticizing China. I hope that our young people in Hong Kong can think independently. Is what some Hong Kong scholars call human rights and democracy natural? Do we need to reflect on the concept of democracy defined by Western countries? Many opinions have been distorted. In the past two years since the COVID-19 outbreak, people worldwide have been reflecting on what true democracy is. China's democracy practice recorded in a white paper titled "China: Democracy That Works" exemplifies the respect for democracy, a typical value of humanity, and distinctive Chinese characteristics. Created by the CPC and the Chinese people, China's democracy is in accord with its national conditions and realities. Protecting human rights is the most essential and fundamental principle of democracy, and putting people's lives, health, and safety first is of the highest value when safeguarding human rights. In the face of the pandemic, we must view objectively which country and political party truly regards people's lives, health, and safety as the highest value, and saves every life at all costs. On the contrary, the country that convened the so-called "democracy summit" has already reached over 800,000 coronavirus-related deaths, exceeding its death toll during World War II. A country that talks about democracy and human rights should have the ability to protect the life and health of its citizens. Therefore, the democratic practices, including the One Country, Two Systems policy of China, a country led by the CPC and home to one-fifth of the world's population, can serve as an experience for global democracy and human rights progress. I hope that everyone, especially the young people in Hong Kong, can think about democracy and human rights independently and care about and follow the democratic development of the country. The country's democracy and human rights development will give new connotations to the One Country, Two Systems policy. On that front, we should be full of confidence and expectation. Thank you.

Wang Zhenmin:

During the 2019 turmoil in Hong Kong, I once said at a conference that we are all concerned about our children eating unhealthy food, but few parents care about our children learning wrong knowledge. We have seen what Hong Kong children have learned in the past few years. They learned about the distorted history of Hong Kong's democracy, full of lies and rumors. The white paper provides an authentic textbook on Hong Kong's history and democracy, worthy of careful study by Hong Kong young people. It is crucial to understand the true history of one's own country. If there is something wrong with the stomach, taking some medicine will do, but what if the false idea poisons the minds? It would be difficult to find the cure. The education of Hong Kong's youth matters. Nevertheless, we are full of confidence in Hong Kong's democracy and the future of Hong Kong. I firmly believe that the prospects are bright for democracy in Hong Kong, just as the white paper said. Thank you.

Shou Xiaoli:

Thank you, experts and friends from the media. Today's briefing is concluded. Goodbye, everyone.

Translated and edited by Huang Shan, Wang Yanfang, Xu Xiaoxuan, Zhang Junmian, Mi Xingang, Wang Yiming, Zhang Rui, Li Huiru, Zhang Jiaqi, Wang Wei, Li Xiao, Liu Sitong, Chen Xia, Zhou Jing, He Shan, Ma Yujia, Liu Qiang, Yang Xi, Wang Qian, Zhang Liying, Yuan Fang, Liu Jianing, Duan Yaying, David Ball, Jay Birbeck, Drew Pittock and Tom Arnstein. In case of any discrepancy between the English and Chinese texts, the Chinese version is deemed to prevail.