香港民主的基礎～從香港民眾對立法會存廢態度分析

港英政府管治末期，雖為香港引入代議民主制度，並以《中英聯合聲明》及香港《基本法》建構「高度自治」的行政體制，惟「一國兩制」的主導權仍牢牢掌握在北京手中。2003年「七一」超過50萬港人走上街頭的抗爭行動，強大的反政府力量令北京中央政府震驚，並重新評估與調整對港政策，嗣後北京介入香港事務漸深，壓制異見的手法也更加強硬。為防止泛民主派透過參選影響議事及抗衡行政體制，北京除高度介入選舉，並以人大釋法否決及推延特首及立法會普選的政改方案，更首次就香港事務發表「一國兩制」白皮書，主張擁有對香港全面管治權。儘管如此，香港民主意識仍持續高漲，政治運動更轉趨激化，面對北京全面介入及管控香港事務，香港的民主基礎是否因此動搖，未來香港是否仍能保有民主元素繼續實施民主制度，為本論文的研究課題。鑑於立法會為香港民意機構，本論文依據臺灣大學胡佛東亞民主研究中心「亞洲民主動態調查香港調查研究計畫」2012年及2016年的兩波調查統計資料，進行「香港居民對立法會存廢態度」分析，並透過立法會歷史沿革及民主運動之梳理，以及2016年迄2021年相關文獻與歷史事件對照分析，推論影響香港民主的元素及香港民主化的變遷與發展。本研究發現，人口學變數與立法會存廢態度具關聯性，其中70歲以上受訪者呈現更為贊成廢除立法會及選舉之態度，顯示長年關注及投入香港民主改革之民運耆老為影響香港民主之重要元素。另社會學變數中以天主教信仰者及中產階層呈現更為贊成廢除立法會及選舉之態度。本研究推論，由於多位香港政界知名人士是天主教徒，使同為天主教徒之香港民眾對守護民主價值有更多的同理與支持；而香港青年公民等中產階層，在2003年「七一」遊行、2014年「雨傘運動」及2019年「反送中」等民主運動中扮演舉足輕重的角色，亦為影響香港民主之重要元素。此外，在政治學變數中，對立法會信任度、自主權及制衡權等變數，均與立法會存廢態度具顯著關聯。「雨傘運動」後，北京透過宣誓效忠等政治審查，撤銷多位議員資格；「反送中」運動後，北京繞過港府制定《香港國安法》，清洗異議人士，並通過修改香港選制建立「愛國者治港」體系，阻絕民主派人士參選，削弱工商界對港府施政之干擾，行政長官的自主權亦遭剝奪。《香港國安法》實施後，多位民運耆老身陷囹圄，中產階層紛紛移居海外，泛民主派的力量分崩離析。新選制下反對黨參選及影響政局的機會渺茫，立法會在無制衡力量下，已淪為橡皮圖章，而國際智庫民主指標亦顯示香港民主元素正加速消逝中。

關鍵字

一國兩制；立法會；民主；基本法；香港國安法

並列摘要

By the end of the British Hong Kong administration, representative democracy was introduced to Hong Kong, and the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Hong Kong Basic Law were put in place to establish an administrative system with “high degree of autonomy”, and yet, Beijing still held firmly in its grasp the control over the “one country, two systems” policy. On the July 1st Marches in 2003, over 500,000 Hong Kong people took to the streets in protest. The strong anti-government forces shocked the central government in Beijing and led to a reassessment and adjustment of its Hong Kong policies. Since then, Beijing’s influence over Hong Kong affairs gradually increased, and its approach in suppressing dissent has grown more forceful. In order to prevent the pan-democratic camp from influencing the legislature and counteracting the administrative system through elections, Beijing not only intervened in the elections, but also vetoed and postponed the election of the Chief Executive and the Legislative Council through the interpretation of the National People’s Congress’ Basic Law. It even issued an unprecedented White Paper on “One Country, Two Systems” towards Hong Kong affairs, asserting its full right to governance over Hong Kong. In spite of Beijing’s actions, Hong Kong’s democratic awareness continues to rise and political movements in Hong Kong have turned more radical. In the face of Beijing’s full-scale intervention and control over Hong Kong affairs, this study aims to examine whether Hong Kong’s democracy foundations have been shaken, and whether Hong Kong will be able to maintain its democratic values and continue its implementation of a democratic system. The Legislative Council is a public opinion institution in Hong Kong, this study analyzed "Hong Kong residents' attitudes towards the retention or abolition of the Legislative Council" based on statistical data collected through two waves of the 2012 and 2016 National Taiwan University Hu Fu Center for East Asia Democratic Studies’ "Asian Barometer Survey", and also analyzed historical developments of the Legislative Council and Hong Kong’s democratic movements, as well as conducted comparative analysis on relevant literature and historical events between the years 2016 to 2021; through such efforts, this studies drew inferences on factors influencing Hong Kong democracy and future changes and development in Hong Kong’s democratization. This study found that demographic variables are correlated with attitudes towards the abolition of the Legislative Council. The surveyed population over the age of 70 mostly agree to the abolition of the Legislative Council and elections, which shows that the elderly population in Hong Kong who have long engaged and been involved in Hong Kong democratic reforms are a major factor influencing Hong Kong’s democracy. As for sociological variables, the Catholic and the middle-class population are also in support for the abolition of the Legislative Council and the elections. This study believes this is due to the fact that many prominent Hong Kong politicians are Catholics, they influence the Catholic Hong Kong population to be more empathetic and supportive of securing democratic values; while the middle class, made up mainly of younger citizens, played a pivotal role through democratic movements such as the July 1st Marches in 2003, Umbrella Movement in 2014, and the Anti-Extradition Movement in 2019, and were also major factors influencing Hong Kong democracy. As for the political science variables, the people’s faith in the Legislative Council and its autonomy, and its checks and balances, are also significantly related to the people’s attitudes towards the retention and abolition of the Legislative Council in that after the Umbrella Movement, Beijing disqualified many legislators through political censorship such as requesting their oath of allegiance; and that after the Anti-Extradition Movement, Beijing bypassed the Hong Kong government and enacted the Hong Kong National Security Law to purge dissidents and established a system of “Patriots Administering Hong Kong” by reforming the electoral system, blocking democrats from running for elections, weakening the industries’ interference in government administration, and depriving Hong Kong’s Chief Executive of her autonomy. As a result of the of the Hong Kong National Security Law’s implementation, many senior citizens of the pro-democratic movement were imprisoned, the middle-class gradually emigrated overseas, and the pan-democratic forces fell apart. Under the new electoral system, the opposition stood little chance in running for elections and influential powers were weakened; the Legislative Council had no opposition voices and was reduced to just a rubber stamp. At the same time, Democracy Index conducted by international think tanks also showed that democratic factors affecting Hong Kong were fading rapidly.