香港主權移轉後一國兩制對香港運用之研究

• Main Authors: Sun Chung Chen, 孫中塵
• Other Authors: Dr.Pan,Hsi-Tang
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2003
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/50895786941212835870

碩士 === 淡江大學 === 大陸研究所碩士在職專班 === 91 === itle of Thesis Total pages：202 Study on the “One Country, Two Systems” model in Hong Kong after the Transfer of Hong Kong Sovereignty（1997－2002） Key word：One Country Two Systems One China Name of Institute：In－Service Master Program in China Studies Graduate date：June 2003 Degree conferred：Master Name of student：Sun Chung Chen Advisor：Dr.Pan Hsi Tang 孫　中　塵 Abstract After Hong Kong sovereignty was transferred to People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1997, the PRC government adopted the model of “one country, two systems”, dubbed “ Hong Kong people rule Hong Kong with a high degree of autonomy”. But in fact, the PRC imposes direct rule on Hong Kong,which means one China principle coated with two systems thus the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) government has become a local government under the PRC rule. The “one country, two systems” formula, according to the PRC, means that national defense and diplomatic policies are subject to the PRC government, while proclaimes that economic and cultural affairs remained as the same independent. For the people in Hong Kong, “one country” is a fact that has left them with no choice but to accept it. Therefore, what they really care about is how effectively the part of “two systems” is carried out. Opinion polls in Hong Kong during the past year showed that the confidence of Hong Kong people on the “one country, two systems” model had declined to less than 60%. Since September 2002, Hong Kong economy has faced the worst downturn ever in the past 13 years, which deepens the fear and doubt of Hong Kong people toward the “one country, two systems” model. Recently, the PRC government has been worried that Hong Kong might be the breeding ground for Falung Gong movement, campaign of Tibetan or Xinjiang independence, and thus maybe leading to the instability of the inland. Another worry of the PRC government is that opinions for and influence of pro-Taiwan independence might spread out via Hong Kong media and thus discourages future reunification of “China”. As a result, the PRC has put the freedom of press and speech in Hong Kong under stricter control and even interfere with judicial independence, let alone Hong Kong human rights protection. This observation indicates that Hong Kong has limited space for future development in political democracy, and the splendor of this “Pearl of the Orient” may fade away. The “one country, two systems” model that PRC implements in Hong Kong, successful or not, is not a mechanism suitable for Taiwan. Taiwan is different from Hong Kong in that Hong Kong used to be a colony of UK until the 1997 Handover, while the Republic of China (ROC) has been a sovereign state since 1912. (The ROC currently has jurisdiction over Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu, with de jure sovereignty over all of China) In other words, Taiwan is not a local government under the PRC rule. For the lasting peace across the Taiwan Strait, both sides should start dialogues under the principles of reason, parity, and reciprocity, based on the idea of “one China with respective interpretations” in the “92’ Consensus”. Both sides need to seek common goals, resolve disputes, and bury the hatchet, in order to deal with cross-strait issues in calm. The PRC should recognize the fact of the ROC’s existence, stop pressuring with possible use of force, and try to earn friendly response among the people on Taiwan. Then both sides will be able to create a harmonious atmosphere, cooperate in economic development and work together for the welfare of the Chinese people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.