Kapok: Detrimental ignorance

The results of the latest yearly survey regarding the trust Macao people place in their government is truly appalling. Not only has Mr Chui Sai On never been so unpopular, but 2017 marks also the first time his approval rating has dipped below the highly symbolic 50% bar. A low(est) score of 49.5% might not seem much, and yet it also corresponds to the largest yearly drop since Mr Chui stepped into the shoes of Mr Edmund Ho: between 2016 and 2017, he lost more than 10 percentage points! In a territory in which people do not get to elect their enlightened leader and the menu is adorned with a unique dish when selection time comes, this is quite a feat: why one would bother when one has no choice?

In 2009, when it was still possible and meaningful to administer political surveys in a Macao-based university, our questionnaire on “civic culture” had actually revealed that far from being politically apathetic the good citizens of Macao simply felt disenfranchised — they had no power over things. Given the opportunity, they indicated that they would actually vouch for a radically different institutional design in order to become at long last the masters of their own destiny: 51% of the people interrogated believed that the best way to designate the Chief Executive (CE) was through universal suffrage, whereas only 14% were satisfied with the way it was, almost 28% thought that the electoral commission electing the CE should be expanded and a mere 7% trusted Beijing to designate their leader directly.

Thus, the 2017 survey indicating such a lamentable popular support for the CE does not come as a surprise, and becomes even more humiliating when hypothetical vote intentions are being gauged: if the CE was this year returned via universal suffrage, only 20% of the Macao citizens would vote for Mr Chui! Again, the worst result ever. And the list goes on: greatest ever overall dissatisfaction (since 1999 moreover!) with the Macao government as a whole (44.3%; for the first time satisfaction has plunged below dissatisfaction); greatest ever dissatisfaction with the capacity of the government to improve the people’s livelihood (53.2%); greatest ever dissatisfaction with the capacity of the government to push for democratic development (39.2%); greatest ever dissatisfaction in the capacity of the government to protect human rights and freedom (28.3%); highest ever distrust in the Macao government (31.2%); highest ever lack of confidence in Macao’s future (26%); and the final blow comes from the question addressing the “people’s satisfaction in the Macao government’s performance after the typhoon”: 54.3% are voicing out their dissatisfaction!

To be fair, a few indicators (a minority) indicate little change: people are still okay with the performance of the government in maintaining economic prosperity (can they really be credited for that?); they are still quite confident in the capacity of the government to handle the relation with Beijing, about the policies coming from up north affecting the SAR, about the “one country, two systems” formula, about China’s own future and even pretty trustful of the central government. But then, isn’t it weird to see this disjunction? Isn’t the CE pre-screened by Beijing prior to even thinking of filling the position and isn’t he appointed by the central government? And the same goes for the secretaries. Shouldn’t Beijing be worried that its loyal executants perform so badly? How long before the level of incompetence starts affecting the people’s perception of the benevolent intentions of the capital?

Now, all the blame seems to come from the catastrophic mishandling of the murderous crisis brought forth by a devastating typhoon. Is that for sure? Will the passing of time mend the gaping distrust thus created? For us to be certain, we would need to run such surveys in Macao (this one is done by the University of Hong Kong) on a monthly basis, to better understand the fluctuations. Interestingly enough, I personally applied for such a monthly endeavour back in 2014, only to be turned down by the Macao Foundation. Time for a change? But with which independent tertiary institution?

Published in Macau Daily Times on December 22, 2017

Kapok: Scaring a monkey to safeguard the chicken

It is no secret that Macao’s political system is not only overly executive-led and highly dependent on the admonitions coming from up north, but also bogged down by vested corporatist interests whose vision regarding Macao’s future seldom goes beyond family or close affiliates, and how these interests fit with the grand design of the day as voiced out in the capital. Oh sure! it’s not one big happy family, and competition between clans can be rife, but like any environment driven by (huge) profit-making things get settled behind closed doors and pragmatism ultimately prevails. In traditional settings, overexposure to light is actually scorned more than the idea of conflict.

The suspension of Sulu Sou Ka Hou from his mandate in the Assembly perfectly illustrates the stern reaction any attempt at offsetting the system will provoke. I am even tempted to believe that newly- appointed legislator Pang Chuan is not lying when he declares that lawmakers, despite voting the suspension by 28 votes against four, did not receive any particular instruction: what’s the need? Out of 33 legislators, only five (some used to say four, and this vote might have helped clarify other things) are truly independent from these vested interests that often translate into conflicts of interest: corporatist branches will automatically bind together as soon as they feel threatened. And Mr Sou, because of his game-changing perspective, represents a threat to all. Ever since he was elected in September he has targeted all aspects of policy-making — and not only dealing with youth or more segmented concerns. He has directly challenged the Chief Executive in his handling of the Hato crisis, and thus questioned the total lack of accountability, starting from the highest echelon, so detrimental to Macao politics. In his own ordeal, he has shone “light” on black box processes, directly exposing on social media the respective positions of the members of the legislature’s House Rules Committee regarding his case, thus highlighting the inherent contradictions between claims and actual practice.

But eventually, the matter boils down to the original sin: what does legislator Sou stand accused of that would warrant a suspension of his mandate? Is he bound to appear in court for a crime of blood? Is he charged with cronyism and has he facilitated the employment of relatives or affiliates in public offices? Has he embezzled public money for personal enrichment?

None of the above: he stands accused of “aggravated disobedience” for having walked in the middle of the road instead of the pavement during a protest in May 2016 and subsequently thrown a paper-plane petition into the garden of the Chief Executive. The object of the demonstration: to protest about the opaque and controversial transfer of MOP100 million to Jinan University (Guangzhou) by the Macao Foundation, that happens to be presided over by the Chief Executive.

Interestingly enough, the biggest beneficiary of funds endowed by the Macao Foundation in 2016 is none other than Macau University of Science and Technology, the very university that employs legislator Pang Chuan. Additionally, Mr Pang’s boss sits on the board of the Foundation and the Executive Council. The second biggest beneficiary is the Kiang Wu Hospital Charitable Association, connected to quite a few legislators too, including Chui family members. The third biggest is the foundation behind the City University of Macao, with connections to at least three legislators. Then the Macao Federation of Trade Unions, the fourth biggest beneficiary, is directly linked to four legislators; etc.

What motivates the suspension of Mr Sou then, contrary to what Mrs Angela Leong or Mr José Chui Sai Peng, both sitting on the board of the Macau Foundation, have said is not the respect for the law or the independence of justice: it is to remind the youngest ever-elected legislator who the boss is! Unfortunately, this has not only been done at the expense of our already fragile rule of law, but also with potentially very disruptive consequences for the harmony of our society.

Published in Macau Daily Times on December 8, 2017