《「一國兩制」在香港特別行政區的實踐》白皮書 對「一國兩制」的衝擊分析

Abstract

「一國兩制」是中共為了融合實行社會主義的中國大陸與實行資本主義的香港所做出的特殊制度性安排，也是一個創新的構想。依中共官方的講法，「一國兩制」理論的提出考慮到了中國的現實和發展的需要而並非一時之計，而是為了實現國家統一，加速社會主義現代化建設的一項長遠戰略決策。「一國兩制」的概念於上世紀七十年代末期被提出時，其原始動機是為了對台灣進行統戰，解決台灣問題。不料卻因1997年新界租約的大限將屆，沈不住氣的英國政府主動送上門來，鄧小平也就順手借用了「一國兩制」的概念，於一九八二年會見柴契爾夫人時，公開宣布九七之後的香港仍將實行資本主義。之後更發展出一套「一國兩制，高度自治，港人治港，五十年不變。」的十七字真言。隨著一九九七香港回歸(中方稱之為恢復對香港行使主權) ，「一國兩制」也就從構想正式變成了憲政制度，不但中共憲法中明文規定了特別行政區的設立，全國人大更通過了《基本法》來落實《中英聯合聲明》中的「一國兩制」十二項原則。所以「一國兩制」在香港的實行，應可說是「有心栽花花不開，無心插柳柳成蔭」。 但是也正因為「一國兩制」的原始本尊只是一個具中國特色的政治口號，之後雖然隨著時間的演變，配合收回香港主權之任務需要，「一國兩制」逐漸的法律化、制度化，以便能夠被實踐。然而，「一國兩制」的政治性DNA卻有意無意的被它的創造者及其繼承人保留了下來。每當中港之間因為政制問題產生矛盾時，「一國兩制」就成了中方主張「一國」先於「兩制」的最佳利器；另一方面，主張「兩制」先於「一國」的香港泛民主派也會引經據典的去證明，北京無權干預特區所擁有的高度自治。正反雙方都各自從「一國兩制」的十七字真言中得到有利於已的解讀。香港近三十年來所經歷的大大小小政治風波，說穿了都離不開這十七個字。 作者認為探討「一國兩制」真正意涵的唯一方法，就是將時空環境還原到它的起始點。雖然「一國兩制」之構想早於上世紀七十年代即已形成，但是真正將其套用在香港問題上的則是鄧小平。因此本文首要之重的是將「一國兩制」的鉛華洗盡，還它本來面目。將研究重點放在面對香港問題時的鄧小平，期望能夠探求到原汁原味的鄧小平式「一國兩制」意涵。並進一步分析《基本法》中所謂授予特區的高度自治之本質及範圍為何。 此次《白皮書》中以極大篇幅論述特別行政區不擁有剩餘權力之理由；此一論點亦是《白皮書》引起港人極大反彈之原因之一。本文則希望跳脫傳統之聯邦制、單一制國家框架，以非典型複合式國家之樣態解讀特別行政區之國家體制。另外以「保留性的本源權力」 來取代剩餘權力之論述。 最後本文將探討回歸以來北京干預特區行政、立法、司法之各種方式以及對「一國兩制」之負面影響。並分析中港經濟社會進一步融合後，最終會造成「一國兩制」無可避免的空洞化。

China’s government released a key policy document titled “White Paper on the One Country Two Systems” (the “White Paper”) in June 2014. Purpose of the White Paper is to spell out Beijing’s interpretation of the “One Country, Two Systems” model that was negotiated as part of Hong Kong’s handover from British rule in 1997. That system, enshrined in Hong Kong’s Basic Law, had granted the territory a high degree of autonomy within China and allowed a fiercely capitalist city and global financial center to flourish – with significant civil liberties and a largely free press and judiciary – under China’s one-party Communist rule. But many in Hong Kong now worry that those liberties are under threat as Beijing asserts what has been described as “total control” in the White Paper. Beijing reaffirmed its promise to allow universal suffrage in 2017 in the election for Hong Kong’s top political post, the chief executive. But at the same time, it made clear that the Chinese government would retain the ultimate say and that only “patriots” would be allowed to run for the job. “Loving the country is the basic political requirement for all of Hong Kong’s administrators,” said White Paper”, widely interpreted as meaning that nobody seen as inimical to Beijing would be allowed to assume key posts in Hong Kong. At the same time, Beijing emphasized that it has “comprehensive jurisdiction” over Hong Kong, which was just “one of the local administrative regions of the country”. It warned that the territory’s “high degree of autonomy is subject to the central government’s authorization” and that the principle of “Two Systems” is subordinate to the idea of “One Country”. Beijing said some people in Hong Kong had a “confused and lopsided” understanding of what the Hong Kong model meant. It also warned “outside forces” against using the city as a way to interfere in China’s domestic affairs – understood to be directed mainly at the US and Britain, whose governments have stressed that China needs to keep its promise to grant Hong Kong democracy. Although Hong Kong’s government welcomed Beijing’s white paper, pro-democracy politicians worried about the future of the “One Country, Two Systems” and the territory’s lost of autonomy. Which eventually lead to the so-called “Umbrella Revolution”.