Internal factors: The political system and the public involvement
Progress of development of the political system
The different progress of development of the democratic system in Taiwan and Hong Kong can be attributed to their internal and unique political structure and role of political parties.
First of all, it should be noted that there are fundamental differences in the design of government structures in Taiwan and Hong Kong. In Taiwan, as long as the boss of the party won the presidential election, he or she will be granted the legitimacy to rule the country, no matter the KMT, DPP or any party he or she comes from. Also, the president was elected by representatives of the National Assembly indirectly. He or she would be responsible for organizing the government. Thus, in the National Assembly, the power to rule the country rested on the political party who controls the majority seats. In contrast, the political system of Hong Kong was highly deviated from Taiwan. In Hong Kong, before 1997 it was the British who appointed the Governor to maneuver the administrative power, but after the handover the Chief Executive was elected by 400 people who are eligible to being in the Election Committee (Kwok, 2003). The British or the Chinese government had never intended to share the power to the local government which was made up by election. Even though direct elections had been introduced by the British government in 1991, administrative power was still strictly held in the hands of the Hong Kong government and the essence of the governance simply did not changed (Kwok, 2003). This can be reflected by the existence of opposition parties and the inability of them to get the ruling power despite they could reach a simple majority in the Legislative Council. Put it simply, the advancement of Hong Kong political party was not permitted and hindered by this kind of built-in limitation of the political system. All these parties or individual as a result could merely play a role of the opposition power and there is no room for them to participate in the making and implementation of the policy. It is quite clear that a line had been drawn by the Hong Kong government to avoid any political parties to undertake daily administration. This cause people’s frustration (especially for those who intended to contribute themselves to the political development) as in reality they can only become a civil servant or even to become close allies with the PRC government or the Chief Executive of Hong Kong.
Besides, the political parties in Hong Kong are in great variance with those in Taiwan. Although Taiwan has never proclaimed independence officially, it was a de facto political reality. In Taiwan, no matter which political power won the election, they are equal in the sense that all of them can have a chance in winning the full control of the administration of the country. This was applicable to both the KMT and the DPP party. Through the opening up of the political...