Advertisement

Opinion | Reshuffle shows Hong Kong government’s commitment to accountability

The sacking of the city’s tourism and transport ministers may have come as a surprise, but the chief executive was merely doing his job

Reading Time:3 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
3
Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu is followed by Mable Chan, who was appointed secretary for transport and logistics, and Rosanna Law Shuk-pui, who was appointed secretary for culture, sports and tourism, at a press conference at the chief executive’s office in Tamar on December 5. Photo: May Tse
The central government’s announcement last week that Hong Kong’s tourism and transport ministers would be replaced, following Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu’s recommendation, came as a surprise to many.
Advertisement

It was unexpected not only because there appeared to be no hint whatsoever that it was going to happen, but also because the reshuffle was seen as coming a bit too early, in the sense that the administration is just short of its midterm.

The biggest surprise, however, came at the press conference to introduce the new appointees, when Lee said: “We will be looking at people who will be doing things under the philosophy ‘there’s never the best, only the better’.” He added: “I want to do more in this two and half years. I want to get the people that will fit my criteria.” This was seen as a thinly veiled accusation that the two removed officials were simply not good enough.
While it is hardly unprecedented for key government officials to be replaced (some even argue that this has become a “constitutional convention”), this was the first time a chief executive has explained a cabinet reshuffle in such a frank way. Was Lee too harsh or simply doing his job properly?
The chief executive’s constitutional power to remove a principal official is well defined in the Basic Law, which makes clear the city leader’s function in not just nominating and reporting to Beijing the appointment of key officials but also in recommending their removal.
Advertisement

But the Basic Law merely spells out the power and procedure under which such functions are to be exercised; it does not tell us by what principle and under what circumstances such power will be exercised. Such constitutional power is not to be exercised capriciously or whimsically, so how is the chief executive guided in its exercise? The answer lies in the nature of the office of the chief executive.

04:09

Hong Kong policy address: John Lee woos money, cuts liquor duty and regulates subdivided flats

Hong Kong policy address: John Lee woos money, cuts liquor duty and regulates subdivided flats
Advertisement