Image credits : France 24
In a significant political development, Hong Kong carried out its first-ever “patriots only” local elections on Sunday, 10th December resulting in several arrests and heightened tensions. The elections, marred by controversies, marked a departure from the city’s previous district council polls in 2019, which saw a historic 71% turnout amid widespread protests.
The current electoral landscape reflects Beijing’s increasing influence, with new rules reducing directly elected seats from 462 to 88. The remaining 382 seats are now controlled by government loyalists, city leaders, and rural landlords, signalling a shift away from democratic representation. Candidates must now seek nominations from government-appointed committees, effectively sidelining pro-democracy parties.
Despite authorities emphasizing that voter turnout was not a concern, an unusual 90-minute extension was granted due to reported issues with the digital system verifying voters’ eligibility. Critics argue that these challenges may further discourage participation, echoing the sentiments of some residents who expressed apathy, citing a perceived one-sided political atmosphere.
City leader John Lee framed the elections as the final step in implementing the “patriots ruling Hong Kong” principle, aimed at eliminating political disloyalty post-2019 protests. Supporters see this as a necessary measure to prevent the district councils from becoming platforms for anti-government sentiments and promoting Hong Kong independence, aligning with Beijing’s vision for stability and national security.
However, scepticism lingers, with concerns that the district councils, traditionally responsible for local issues like sanitation and public facilities, will now serve as mere government echo chambers. Political scientist Kenneth Chan expressed that they would behave as “local consultative bodies in name and as the government’s echo chamber in practice.”
Security was tight during the elections, with over 12,000 police officers deployed to prevent disturbances. Six individuals, including activists and a government employee, were arrested. The League of Social Democrats, one of the city’s few remaining opposition groups, reported members being arrested while planning a protest, labelling the situation “extremely ironic and ridiculous.”
The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) was involved in several cases, including allegations of attempting to disrupt elections and inciting others not to vote. Separately, individuals were arrested for reposting or commenting on social media posts that allegedly encouraged invalid ballots. These incidents underscore the heightened sensitivity surrounding political expression in Hong Kong.
As the election results unfold, Hong Kong finds itself at a crossroads, navigating a political landscape reshaped by Beijing’s influence and marked by the absence of a significant opposition presence. The implications of these changes extend beyond the local councils, raising questions about the future trajectory of Hong Kong’s governance and the preservation of its unique political identity.