香港區議會與基層政治

Abstract

長期以來，因為「九七回歸」、「一國兩制」等因素，台灣對香港的政治研究，多半將關注的焦點放在上層的政治制度，如行政長官（特首）、立法會的選舉和職能，亦或是政治民主化的討論。本文認為，一個地方的基層政治，如何的發展？具有什麼樣的成長過程？才是影響其政治文化產出的基礎。因此，本文以Lefebvre、Soja的空間理論、後殖民學者Chatterjee的政治社會理論，做為進入香港基層政治田野中的認識論基礎；透過歷史和社會學新制度主義的途徑，以區議會和區議員做為研究標的，來瞭解現今香港基層政治的面貌與對於香港政治文化發展的意義。<br>研究結果發現，香港雖然經歷了1997年的「解殖」，但因為來自《基本法》和「主權」的制約因素，所以基層政治制度發展仍然無法脫離過去殖民時期的脈絡。區議會擁有在最多數直選代表的組織，仍是被「吸納」、「鎖進」特區政府的地方行政管治主導架構當中，讓區議會只能發揮它代表基層民意接受來自特區政府的「諮詢」，而無法在制度上發揮充份制衡或影響行政權的能力。這符合了「政治社會」對於後殖民時期下的政治制度與底層人民參與之間距離的解釋。此外也發現，1997年之後來自於中國的新移民，在漸漸取得香港選舉的投票資格之後，也將開始影響未來香港的選舉和政治發展。<br>雖然香港的民主派持續地將民主制度、普選制度，放在香港政治發展過程中，作為一個很重要的追求目標。但是從回顧過去歷史的發展，到現在香港基層代議政治運作，以及未來發展的模式來看；代議民主、地方自治的那種「自主性」，並不是香港基層政治制度演變的重心。而基層民意代表組織對於民眾的意義，也集中在於提供類似「社會服務」的功能。即便所謂擴大區議會職能的改革計劃，也是包括在「地方行政」的思維中來推行，區議會仍然是輔助「行政權」的「委託」組織，而不是有能力和行政權並行的「自治組織」。如此，這就是本文所言，在民眾、區議會和區議員對於地方代議組織，角色認知的「異化」。毫無疑問地，這樣的「異化」，對於如民主派想建構的「民主政治制度」是有不小的落差。甚至最後就有可能將解殖後的香港政制，不斷地鎖回到殖民時期的風貌上。而這究竟是集體政治文化的選擇？亦或是主權者有意識的操作？不可否認的，本文認為，這兩種特性都存在於現在香港的基層政治文化當中。區議員的價值和地位，因為角色認知的「異化」，有可能不會更加弱化，但暫時似乎也找不到往地方自治方向再提升的動力了。脫離了殖民統治之後，香港市民應該有更多的正當性可以藉由選舉投票、公民集體運動來展現他們的聲音；香港未來的政治文化會往哪個方向走，現在的基層政治將會是塑造的起點。

For a long terms, due to factors such as ”Handover in 1997”, ”One Country Two Systems”, Taiwan’s political research on Hong Kong is usually focused on the political system on the upper layer, for example, the administrative officer (Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region), the election and function of Legislative Council, or the discussion on political democracy. In this article, it was thought that how the Local Politics is developed, what kind of growth process it has is the basis to affect the political and cultural output. Therefore, in this article, the Space Theory of Lefebvre, Soja, the Political Society theory of Post-colonialism Chatterjee is used as the basis to enter the rural epistemology of the Local Politics of Hong Kong; through the path of historical and social new system principle, District Council and District Councilor are used as research targets to understand the meaning of the current Hong’s face of Local Politics on the political and cultural development of Hong Kong.<br>It is found from the research result that although Hong Kong has passed through the ”de-colonialism” in 1997, yet because of the limiting factors from “Basic Law” and ” sovereignty”, its development in Local Politics system still can not escape from the past path of colonial period. District Council is an organization that owns the largest number of directly elected representatives, yet it is still ”absorbed”, ”locked into” the main structure the local administrative government of the Special Region Government; therefore, District Council can only exploit its function to represent the people’s opinions to accept the ”consultation” from the Special Region Government, and its capability to fully balance or affect the administrative power in the system can not be exploited. This meets the explanation of the distance between the political system and the participation of the people in the bottom layer in the post-colonialism period from ”Political Society”. In addition, it is also found that the new immigrants from Mainland China after 1997, after the gradual acquisition of the election right in the local election of Hong Kong, they start to affect the future election and political development in Hong Kong.<br>Although the democratic party of Hong Kong continues to put democratic system and general election system into the political development process of Hong Kong to be used as a very important pursuit target, yet if we take a look from a review of the past historical development to the to the basic representative politic operation in modern Hong Kong, as well as future development model, Representative Democracy and “autonomy” of local self-government is not the evolution center of Local Politics system in Hong Kong. Meanwhile, the meaning of the basic representative organization of the public’s opinion is centered around the supply of the function similar to ”social service”. Even the improvement project for the expansion of the function of District Council is also included in the thinking of ”local administration” for the implementation; District Council is still a “consigned” organization to assist ”the administrative right” but not a ”Self-government organization” that has both power and administrative right. Therefore, this is what is mentioned in this article, this is ”alienation” among the public, District Council and District Councilor on the recognition of the local representative organization and role. No doubt, such ”alienation” has a pretty much gap to the ”Democratic political system” that the democratic party is going to build. It is even possible that the political system of Hong Kong after de-colonial period is continuously locked into the look in the colonial period. But is this the choice of group political culture or the conscious operation of the top level people who owns the power? Undeniably, it is thought in this article that both these characteristics all exist in the current Local Politics culture of current Hong Kong. The value and position of District Councilor, due to the ”alienation” of role recognition, might not be further weakened, but it is temporarily difficult to find power for the enhancement toward the direction of local self-government. After the escape from colonial governing, residents of Hong Kong should have more justification to send out their voices through voting in an election and the civic group movement; where the future politic and culture of Hong Kong is going to head toward, the current Local Politics is going to be a starting point for its final shape.