Macau Matters

Macau’s Government adopted legislation to bring its electoral law regime into compliance with the National People’s Congress Standing Committee’s 7 November 2016 interpretation of Article 104 of the Hong Kong Basic Law (the ‘2016 Interpretation’). That adoption is now paying dividends, from an authoritarian point of view.  Macau had already been working on amendments to its electoral regime in anticipation of the 2017 quadrennial Legislative Assembly election. The original proposal generated controversy throughout the summer of 2016 for expanding the candidate screening powers of the local Legislative Assembly Election Affairs Commission (CAEAL) – a municipal body whose membership is appointed by the Chief Executive. Macau’s then-Secretary of Administration and Justice, Sonia Chan, sought deeper amendments following the 2016 Interpretation. The revised version was introduced along with an explanatory text on 7 December 2016. The document is notable for its drafters’ views of Macau’

A great leveling is occurring between the political systems of Macau and Hong Kong – one that not only irons out differences between the two local governments, but moves them both closer to the system of mainland China. The longstanding, on-and-off pattern of centripetal pressure has expedited again in the past year. Indeed, the governance of China’s two Special Administrative Regions has always appeared much the same to central authorities in Beijing, despite the two cities’ vastly different historical and cultural contexts. Beijing refused an initial Portuguese offer to handover Macau in 1974, citing a desire to reclaim Macau and Hong Kong at the same time. Functional constituencies – the hallmark form of indirect suffrage during the Portuguese colonial era – were grafted into Hong Kong’s new Legislative Council in 1985. About the same time, state newspapers floated the idea of combining Macau and Hong Kong into a single SAR. When explaining a draft of the Macau Basic Law in 19