A Jurisprudential Analysis Of Disputes About The Nomination Of Chief Executive's In Hong Kong's Political Reform

On June 18 th, 2015, The Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region failed to pass the motion concerning the amendment to the method for the selection of the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, which meant that Hong Kong had suffered a serious setback in this political reform. The failure of political reform is affected by many factors. In general, the focus of the dispute between the Pro-Establishment Camp and the Pan Democratic Camp is focused on the way how the Chief Executive is nominated. The Pro-Establishment Camp's Nomination Committee strictly follows the constitution, the basic law and a series of decisions of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, while the Pan Democratic Camp believes that the Nomination Committee has a screening mechanism and other unreasonable factors and advocates other ways of nomination. This article will focus on the nomination of Chief Executive. In reference to other countries and regions about the nomination of the Chief Executive, author will have a jurisprudential analysis about the two camp's method of the nomination. Eventually, it is concluded that the Pro-Establishment Camp's Nomination Committee is legal and reasonable, while the Pan Democratic Camp's schemes are infeasible.This paper is divided into four parts. The first part introduces the history of Hong Kong's political reform and the pentalogy of Hong Kong's political reform, the Nomination Committee method established by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress in the "8.31 decision", the Hong Kong government' method and the Pan Democratic Camp's schemes. In order to prove the nonexistent of the international standards for nomination,the second part introduces the nomination of the head of government or the nomination of the head of state in the United States, France, Britain, Germany, Japan, Singapore and other countries. The third part is the core part of this paper, which will discuss the basic principle of the political reform of Hong Kong, the legality and rationality of the Nomination Committee method, the Pan Democratic Camp's schemes are infeasible. The forth part is a conclusion, which carries out some reflections to the failure of this political reform and tries to put forward the author's suggestions and wishes.