The current debate about political reform in Hong Kong will not end after legislators vote on the political reform recommendation of the SAR government on June 23. Whatever the outcome, the debate about political reform will continue. The fact is there is no ideal package that will satisfy everybody.

However, it is of utmost importance that Hong Kong maintain and improve its public governance mechanism in general - in particular the rule of law, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, protection of private property, protection of basic human rights, accountability of public officials, transparency and due process for anything involving public resources and public power. In particular, officials and politicians must not jeopardize their credibility by being caught in positions involving conflicts of interest.

One central issue to the debate has to do with the role of functional constituencies in the legislature. Many people are unhappy about some legislators getting their positions in the Legislative Council with far fewer votes than popularly elected members - indeed some were "elected" without opposing candidates. But actually more central to the public interest is how these members perform their duties. Do they apply "due diligence" as legislators? Do they care about "their constituents' interests" more than the general societal interest? Do they vote when there is a clear conflict of interest, or do they abstain? In my view, they should be asked to abstain whenever there is a possible conflict of interest.

To me, functional constituencies can have a positive role although they can also go counter to the public interest. People from different backgrounds can share their different perspectives, which should allow everybody to see the whole picture confronting Hong Kong. However, if they are preoccupied with the narrow interests of their "constituents", legislators representing functional constituencies will defeat the whole purpose. One famous quote from Edward Burke is, "You choose a member, indeed; but when you have chosen him, he is not a member of Bristol, but he is a member of Parliament." Although he was not referring to functional constituencies, the same principle applies. A member of parliament in the UK, just as a legislator in Hong Kong, should be accountable not only to his own constituency in a narrow sense. The constituency for a legislator is all Hong Kong citizens, because he is elected to a position that carries powers with implications for Hong Kong as a whole.

In "democracies" with poor public governance, public power becomes a person's personal treasury. This is the main reason why there is so much violence associated with elections in many developing countries. In industrialized countries, including the US and the United Kingdom, public governance mechanisms work more effectively, and gross abuse of power is usually less blatant, but still occurs from time to time. Violence related to elections is rare. But there is a lot of violence in the Philippines, India, Thailand, and Indonesia. Democracy is not worth much in these countries, because they fail to afford their citizens personal safety, the rule of law and peace. To press for "more" democracy with little regard for other public governance mechanisms is to lose sight of the forest for the trees.

I would, however, urge Hong Kong people to watch out for power abuses, abuse of human rights, interference with the rule of law, interference with press freedom, etc. While freedom of the press is paramount and basic to Hong Kong society, it should not be without limits. However, in accordance with the rule of law, the process of vetting what is improper should be transparent and acceptable to Hong Kong people at large, rather than determined by bureaucrats or people associated with those in power. Specifically, language that stirs up hatred against specific groups, religious intolerance, as well as other anti-social language can and should carry suitable criminal consequences. As is often said, words can cut deeper than a sword. Civilized society needs to use language in civilized ways.

Hong Kong, as well as the mainland, needs to have a reliable system that can be counted on to make public officials accountable to prevent them from abusing their power. Hong Kong has been relatively strong in this regard, but its past strength cannot be taken for granted. Beijing well understands that the mainland is still short on this account, and there is a lot to do to strengthen its public governance mechanisms. Indeed according to President Hu Jintao, "Power is used for the people; emotions are tied to the people; benefits are achieved for the people." Only when this ideal materializes can the mainland and Hong Kong in particular hope to become a more cohesive and harmonious society. All parties: - government, politicians, business, as well as the general public - should work together to make sure that public officials work in the best interest of the people and not for the interest of themselves or their associates.

The author is director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies, Lingnan University.

(HK Edition 06/22/2010 page2)