The Occupy Movement in Hong Kong: Origins, Processes and Consequences

• Other Authors: Yang, Shen (author.)
• Format: Others
• Language: English; Chinese
• Published: 2016
• Online Access: http://repository.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/en/item/cuhk-1292402

本文研究了香港佔領運動的政治過程。通過深入訪談和檔案資料，本文認為香港的佔領運動的特點是各持份者之間存在錯誤認知，溝通失當以及不恰當的應對方法。運動最合適的定義是憲制性不服從，而不是運動領袖所聲稱的公民不服從。 === 在強烈的不滿以及感知到的政治機會的驅動下，佔領中環的領袖在2013年初發起了佔中運動，並且以“公民抗命”作為運動框釋。為了能夠得出權威的方案，並且在政改中由公民社會領導政治社會，運動組織了一系列“商討日”。但參與者的自我選擇使得商討日成為事實上的運動動員。商討日逐漸被激進政治力量主導，而溫和民主派被疏遠。 === 中國政府把佔領中環運動視為對香港管治權的爭奪。因為溝通失當和對外國干預的恐懼，中國政府做出了過度回應。首先是通過白皮書嘗試重新解讀憲政秩序，其後人大常委做出決定，提出一個有政治篩選的選舉框架。中國政府的決定被香港市民視為其對民主和自治承諾的背叛。 === 學生其後介入並且開展了一場學生運動，並最終發展為雨傘運動。學聯首先發起了罷課並且以“命運自決”作為主要框釋，指責基本法繼承了殖民地時代的政治經濟制度，把香港二次殖民。在雨傘運動爆發後，大部分示威者，包括學生領袖，在和政府比拼對憲制性文件的理解，進行一場憲制性不服從。當運動參與在初期到達巔峰後，示威者嘗試通過抗爭策略的升級和尋求潛在的精英同盟來維持運動，但這些努力沒有奏效。在一開始的鎮壓失敗後，政府採用了拖延消耗的策略。政府最後通過禁制令使運動終結，因為司法體系仍然保持了認受性，同時大部分示威者不願意挑戰法治。 === 本文認為佔領運動最適合被歸類為憲制性不服從。示威者遵從一國兩制的憲政秩序，但試圖通過對憲制文件的解讀，為基本法對民主權利的一些關鍵限制鬆綁。憲制性不服從接受憲政秩序和司法機構的權威，但不接受政治制度的合法性。憲制性不服從可以發生在一種獨特的政體－自由不民主。在自由不民主政體，公民自由，法治，憲政主義已經確立，司法機構得到廣泛尊重，但一個有認受性的民主政府還沒有被確立。這個新名詞可以對理解轉型國家和後殖民地區的抗爭作出新的貢獻。 === This dissertation studies the political process of the Occupy Movement in Hong Kong. Drawing on in-depth interviews and archival research, this study argues the movement is characterized as the misperceptions, miscommunications, and mistreatments among the main stakeholders. The movement is best defined as constitutional disobedience, instead of civil disobedience as claimed by movement leaders. === Driven by the strong grievance and perceived political opportunity, the leaders of Occupy Central started the campaign in early 2013 and framed it as a “civil disobedience” movement. Aiming at figuring out an authoritative proposal and letting the civil society lead political parties in the political reform, the campaign organized a series of “deliberation days”, yet the self-selection of the participants made the DDays become de facto movement mobilization. The DDays were gradually dominated by radical political forces that alienated moderate democrats. === The Chinese government perceived the Occupy Central campaign as a struggle for the governing power in Hong Kong. With the miscommunication and the fear of foreign intervention, the Chinese government over-reacted by first announcing the White Paper that attempted to reinterpret the constitutional order, followed by the NPCSC’s Decision that offered an election framework with political pre-screening, which were treated as a betray of the promises of autonomy and democracy by Hong Kong citizens. === The students then stepped in to start a student movement that finally evolved to the Umbrella Movement. The HKFS first started a class boycott campaign with the master frame of “self-determination of fate” and blaming the Basic Law for recolonizing Hong Kong as it inherited the colonial political-economic system. After the outbreak of Umbrella Movement, most protesters, including the student leaders, were having a constitutional disobedience by competing with the government for constitutional understandings. After the movement participation reached its peak in the initial days, the protesters tried to sustain the movement through tactical escalations and looking for potential elite allies, but all such efforts did not work. The government adopted the strategy of exhaustion after initial repression backfired. The government finally made use of the injunctions to end the movement, as the legal institutions remained its legitimacy and most protesters were not willing to challenge the rule of law. === This study argues the Occupy Movement is best characterized as constitutional disobedience. The protesters adhered to the constitutional order of “One Country, Two Systems” but tried to relax some key constraints on democratic rights imposed by the Basic Law through the interpretation of constitutional document. Constitutional disobedience accepts constitutional order and legal institutions but rejects the legitimacy of political institutions. Constitutional disobedience could take place in a singular polity-liberal autocracy, where civil liberty, rule of law, and constitutionalism have been well established, legal institutions have been widely respected, but a legitimate democratic government has yet to be set up. The new term could contribute to understanding the popular contention in transitional countries and post-colonial regions === Yang, Shen. === Thesis Ph.D. Chinese University of Hong Kong 2016. === Includes bibliographical references (leaves ). === Abstracts also in Chinese. === Title from PDF title page (viewed on …). === Detailed summary in vernacular field only. === Detailed summary in vernacular field only. === Detailed summary in vernacular field only. === Detailed summary in vernacular field only. === Detailed summary in vernacular field only.