Hong Kong 01 Weekly
It can be fried if there is a three -power separation of Hong Kong. Government officials, politicians, and legal circles arguing endlessly, it is really ridiculous.It is not difficult to find out that most people agree that Hong Kong has three powers in administration, legislation and justice, and checks and balance between the three powers. This dispute is even more politicized and unnecessary.What's more interesting is that in the past, people who have been lamenting that the rule of law has died, freedom is no longer, and even claiming that Hong Kong has entered the autocratic governance. Now, it is the most intense to adhere to the separation of three powers in Hong Kong and check the balance of each other.Does our realization of Hong Kong's actual perception have a deviation?
Recently, a high school general textbook was reviewed by the professional consulting service of the Education Bureau, deleted or modified the content of Hong Kong as the separation of three powers.The director of the Education Bureau Yang Runxiong and the Chief Executive Lin Zhengyue later said that Hong Kong did not have the separation of three powers, but the latter also pointed out that Hong Kong's administrative, legislative and judicial three powers performed their duties, and they could cooperate with each other or check the balance of each other.At first glance, many people think that officials say that they are contrary to common sense, and they have accused the government distorting the facts with the Great Phase Court they have learned and understood since childhood.But as long as they do not only read the news title, but to understand that the officials do not have the division of power above, it is inevitable that the officials actually point out that Hong Kong has three powers in administration, legislation and judicial, and the three powers check and balance each other. For example, Lin Zhengyue'eIt is pointed out that the decision of the administrative organs can be challenged by judicial review.What officials emphasized that the three powers were not sitting up, but to pursue the principles of administrative leadership, and therefore believed that the constitutional order of Hong Kong was described by the three powers to be too rough.Opponents insist that they have both three powers and check balances each other, which means that Hong Kong has three powers.This may be as discussions as half a glass of water, and it is difficult to have any results.
The argument may be that people try to divide everything like a philosopher Karl Popper. In this dispute, which political systems must be divided into three powers and which are not.
The three power systems are similar but different
At the beginning of the last century, Sun Yat -sen proposed the Five Power Constitution. Taiwan has retained the examination institute and the supervisory institute. It may be an example of obvious non -triple power separation, but it still meets the general English statement of the three powers.What's more, there are differences in the separation of the three powers in many places. The separation of the three powers in the United States is very different from the British ones: the former of the former, Congress, and the courts of the three powers are clear, the personnel have not overlapped each other.Differentiated three powers to check and balance each other; but in the UK that adopts parliamentary system, the Cabinet Minister is basically a former member of the major party in the Congress. Before the establishment of the Supreme Court, the appellant in charge of the final trial was also a member of the House of Congress.The three judicial three overlap.But even the Western sensitivity of the United Kingdom, Montesquieu, a French thinker who proposed the separation of the three powers, uses it to explain the division of power.It can be seen that the separation of three powers may be similar to that of a family member, and there is no precise definition.
So, how similar to Hong Kong's political system and three powers?This is a matter of factual but not standardism. Everyone cannot just throw out what the constitutional order of Hong Kong is in the minds, but it depends on what it is.To answer this question, we can only return to the Basic Law MDASH; MDASH in the constitutional documents in Hong Kong; find the answer.In Chapter 4 of the Basic Law, the first and second sections are Chief Executives and Administrative Organs, and the third section is the legislature, and the fourth section is the judicial organs, showing a very obvious three -powered structure.The responsibilities of these three powers are simple in terms of administrative leadership, legislative checks and balances, and judicial independence.For example, Article 73 of the Basic Law states that the Legislative Council reviews the fiscal budget and a question of the government's work, which shows that the responsibilities of the administrative department of check -in; Article 85 to protect the court's independent trial without any interference, and also shows judicial independence.In addition to the provisions, the government proposal is actually rejected by the Legislative Council and the examples of losing the lawsuit in judicial review.From this perspective, it is not difficult to understand why many people insist on saying that Hong Kong is divided into three powers.
However, since the separation of the three powers is not perfect and the similarity is similar, it will naturally be different.One of Hong Kong's features are administrative and dominant, and the three powers are not equal.Article 43 of the Basic Law states that the Chief Executive is the head of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and representing the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Compared with the foreign parliament, the power of the Legislative Council is also limited.And although the Legislative Council can accuse the Chief Executive's serious illegal or malfeasance and not resign, he proposed an impeachment case, but according to Article 73 of the Basic Law, the Central People's Government must be reported to decide.When the chief executive appointed judges, in addition to the chief judges of the High Court and the Court of Final Appeal, they did not need to be consent by the Legislative Council.Some people are lightly described by the facts of administrative leadership or even pretending to be invisible.
The duties of the three powers under the sovereignty of one country
Another difference between Hong Kong is that the more important and more constitutional principles are one country, two systems, and the central sovereignty above the three systems of administration, legislation and judicial.Hong Kong's three powers do not come from We The People as the United States, nor do they have supreme sovereignty like the British Congress. Instead, they are awarded by the National People's Congress. According to the Basic Law, the central government is regulated by the central government in different forms.The Chief Executive is responsible for the Central People's Government. For example, Article 45 and 48 of the Basic Law stipulates that the Chief Executive and Major Officials are appointed by the Central People's Government; the legislative power is supervised by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. For example, according to Article 17The Basic Law on the affairs of the central government and the terms of the central government and the relationship between the central government and the Hong Kong, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress can send it back to the law and invalidate it; the judicial power is also subject to certain specifications, including the 158th list of the interpretation of the Basic Law.And Hong Kong courts should explain the judgment in accordance with its explanation.
According to the structure of the duty of the three powers, of course, we can say that Hong Kong is the separation of three powers, but this is also the separation of three powers with the characteristics of Hong Kong. All three are authorized by the central government and are regulated.The policy of governing the central government is the governance of Hong Kong people and high autonomy of Hong Kong people. It has granted administrative, legislative and judicial power with the Basic Law. Generally, it will not intervene in the operation of Hong Kong.Will exercise power in Hong Kong.The decision of the National People's Congress on the National Security Law of the Hong Kong and the decision of the Standing Committee of the People's Congress on the delay of the Legislative Council is an example of sovereignty exercising legislative power in Hong Kong.
The two shots of the central government's extension of the Hong Kong National Security Law and the Legislative Council have caused many people to claim that the rule of law in Hong Kong collapsed and loses its guarantee., Also these people.Guo Rongzheng, a member of the Legislative Council of the Legislative Circle, pointed out that the separation of three powers is an important constitutional principle behind the law.The permissions and functions provide effective checks and balances on the exercise of administrative power.It is necessary to know that when Montesquien proposed the principle of three powers, it was pointing out that by avoiding excessive concentration of power, it can benefit people's freedom.To recognize the Basic Law favorable to protect freedom.The latter point is exactly what we have always emphasized.
Facts, why bother with the facts
In fact, it is not just the separation of three powers. Hong Kong society often argues with issues such as democracy, freedom, and rule of law.But discussions must be based on facts if you don't want to talk about roots.For the situation in Hong Kong, this foundation is the Basic Law.As long as the Basic Law determines the independent judicial power and final trial power of Hong Kong, the Legislative Council can exercise various supervision of government administration power. Regardless of whether the content of the general textbooks of middle schools increases or decreases, the three words are separated from the three words, and the Chief Executive, the Director of the Education Bureau or the individual individual individualsWhat the judge says this issue will not change the fact that this responsibilities will be changed.The three -right checks and balances will not be because the chief executive says that there are no three powers, and the rule of law will not die because some politicians will die.
fragrantThe constitutional order of Hong Kong is not only stated in the Basic Law, and it has also lived for many years since the return.Officials are now high -profile opposition to the separation of three powers, which may make people think that it is expected that they are negating the checks and balances of legislation and judicial power.However, as the former chairman of the Legislative Council Zeng Yucheng described the controversy as the self -disturbance of the mediocre people, Tang Jiazheng, a member of the Executive Council and senior barrister, expressed a bit unnecessary. The former director of the Minister of Political Affairs Tang Yingnian also pointed out that it would speculate every few years. The actual impact was not great.We must return to the Basic Law to understand the political system of Hong Kong, which is just a tongue.Hong Kong people have a high cost of living, rising unemployment rates, and continued increase in poor people. Officials and social personnel should put their minds and time on these arguments, or should they deal with other more real things?The answer is self -evident.
