| This dissertation examines the dual accountability of the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the People's Republic of China. As stipulated in Article 43 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the Chief Executive "shall be accountable to the Central People's Government and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region...." The Basic Law, thus, creates a situation where one agent serves two principals, while raising a theoretical question for the liberal notion of political accountability. With its emphasis on sanction as the indispensable tool for reinforcing responsiveness, the liberal notion of political accountability implies that one agent cannot possibly serve two principals, unless the two principals seek identical goals and conceptualize the role of agent in the same way, and exercise sanctioning powers with full agreement. The dual accountability experiment hence puts the logic and limits of the liberal accountability theory to the test.This study begins with the assumption that the Chief Executive's dual accountability is an impossible mission, as liberal accountability theory would imply. In searching for a remedy, different connotations and models of accountability are examined, the politico-legal framework of the office of the Chief Executive is reviewed and the dynamics among the competing, players---the people in the Hong Kong SAR and the Central People's Government as the principals, and the Chief Executive as the agent---are analyzed. The possibilities of the construct are then evaluated and remedies to it deliberated.The study concludes that the Chief Executive's dual accountability need not be an impossible mission, either from a theoretical or an empirical perspective. That said, the practice of dual accountability must take into account the significance of the liberal notion of accountability that has emerged in Hong Kong. Despite the possibility of further demarcating its functions and roles, the smooth functioning of the office of the Chief Executive depends on the willingness and the ability to negotiate solutions between the contending parties. It also depends on the participants to internalize the values in both responsiveness and responsibility. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)... |
