Kapok: Everything must change...

In The Leopard, the beautiful novel by Lampedusa set in slow-changing Sicily, Trancredi’s famous assertion that “everything must change for everything to remain the same” holds a particular truth for Macao, especially so when considering the latest urge by the Chief Executive’s family to widen its hold on power in the SAR.

When learning last week about the scheme to promote Mr Chui Sai Cheong, the Chief Executive’s brother, to the “elected” position of Vice President of the Legislative Assembly, my first reaction was one of disbelief. I had been under the impression that since May 2014, when 20,000 people took to the street against the extravagant preferential treatment senior officials were conferring to themselves, that some kind of attempt at greater adequacy between the people’s expectations and the priorities of the government — not only in speeches — would be the new normal in Macao.

One can easily perceive the lingering danger of deception: years of maladministration and substandard urban development coupled with the inept management of a tragedy that ultimately claimed 10 lives can in large part explain the remarkable results of the pan-democrats in the September 17th legislative elections. The New Macau Association-affiliated legislators made history by totalling more than 30,000 votes, and if José Pereira Coutinho and Agnes Lam are added, we are talking about a sizeable 55,000 votes and more than 40% of the elected seats. Moreover, the youngest ever elected legislator, 26-year old Sulu Sou, officially representing NMA, happens to have been the main organizer of the May 2014 protest!

Choosing a handful of academics as appointees could also be seen as a wise move on the part of the Chief Executive, and at the very least paying lip-service to the grand plan of “scientific policy-making”. Why then cast a shadow on the resolve to engage in “sunshine government”?

As reported in the press, there was quite a bit of lobbying in order to ensure the “election” of Chui Sai Cheong prior to the vote last Monday. In a way, this is reassuring as it seems to indicate that not everybody was convinced this was the best of options. If we leave aside the merits, the question of seniority does not hold as President Ho Iat Seng has himself been a member of the LA only since 2009, whereas the longest-serving legislator is Ng Kuok Cheong, a democrat. Then, if custom is to be considered, we now have two business-related legislators at the helm of the LA, a first since the handover as these two positions have traditionally been split between labour and business pro-establishment camps. But if reticences there were, they apparently cleared out over the weekend: Mr Chui Sai Cheong received 29 votes out of 33 during the first plenary session!

Clearly, this is not illegal for Mr Chui-the-brother to become Vice President of the LA, but this is not a matter of legality — although it should be if one considers that the independence of powers is enshrined in the Basic Law, or is it really? In case of absence of the President, the Vice President presides over meetings, decides on the dates and convenes special and emergency sessions: how would that look? And the argument of smallness of Macao does not hold, as smaller cities in the world manage to extend the circles of trust beyond the family bonds. Even the Kaczyński brothers — twins! — in Poland kept their act only on the side of the executive branch.

As we are reminded by the OECD, a conflict of interest can be defined as “a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest,” and this, in turn, is “considered an indicator, a precursor and a result of corruption.” Quite a treacherous line to walk at the time of the 19th Congress further north.

Published in Macau Daily Times on October 20, 2017

Kapok: The Crux of the Matter

A week ago, HK01, a Hong Kong-based Chinese online newspaper cooperating with The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists revealed that our Chief Executive, Fernando Chui Sai On, and his legislator elder brother, Chui Sai Cheong, had been closely connected to an offshore company, Yee Shing International Limited, registered in the British Virgin Islands, for about two decades. As a subsidiary of Hopewell Holdings Limited, a major infrastructure and property firm listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange since 1972 (with revenues of HKD6.64 billion in 2015), this offshore had in effect been co-founded by Chui Sai Cheong together with a long-term executive of Hopewell.
The Chief Executive was only director of the tax-free company for two short years, starting in 1997, and resigned from his directorship on July 30th 1999, shortly before it was announced that he would become, after the December 19 handover, the new Secretary for social affairs and culture. His brother, on the contrary, was only out of Yee Shing for a short spell in 1994 and was still listed as a director in 2010 when Mossack Fonseca, the now rather infamous Panamanian law firm, lost the custody contract for the offshore. HK01 consequently wondered why this function had never been enclosed in Chui Sai Cheong’s declaration of assets, the one all senior officials are supposed to divulge since a more stringent law on such matters was passed in January 2013—more than six years after the arrest of Ao Man Long, better late than never…
Interestingly enough, both brothers came up with a public explanation, and of course these were in line with the responses aired back in April when the so-called Panama papers, of which 29 percent of offshore firms were incorporated either in Hong Kong or China, started to unravel: why the big fuss, when all this is legal?! Chui Sai Cheong gave an interview to the ever-zealous and pro-establishment Chinese newspaper Macao Daily revealing that he had actually resigned from the director position in July 2012 (spoiler!), and that he, therefore, acted in accordance with the new asset declaration law. And then, Chui Sai On’s Spokesperson’s Office made it publicly known that by resigning from all business-related positions prior to his nomination to senior public posts he had been “strictly following the Basic Law of the MSAR”. And things simply went back to normal: silence!
I already argued earlier this year that governing is not only a matter of legality, and that responsibility in politics requires slightly more than being law abiding in grey areas—and the Panama papers are raw diamonds in that respect. The time when traditional paternalistic elites could profess “do as I say and not as I do” is coming to an end, and unfortunately not necessarily pointing to a reassuring future, whatever the setting, democratic or less so—think US, the Philippines, China, etc.
What these offshore leaks have revealed for Macao is well established: paragons of virtue and patriotism, even the ones representing Macao at the CPPCC or the NPC, are the ones practising “tax evasion” on an industrial scale while holding dual nationality. But for the Chui, dysfunctions are of another nature: what is the exact purpose of holding an official position? The younger Chui resigned 12 days before being nominated Secretary and the elder Chui resigned  from Yee Shing right in the middle of the revision of the new asset declaration law (passed in 2013, but introduced in December 2011)? In finance, that would be called “insider trading”! And then what about the separation of powers: the two brothers played musical chairs in the very same business! Moreover, Chui Sai On was supposed to champion social and economic housing, both as a legislator starting in 1992 and as a Secretary afterwards, while his brother, now a legislator, was helping Hopewell ripe the full benefits of luxury real-estate programs such as Nova Taipa and then Nova City?
Promiscuity is a powerful excuse on a tiny territory that has a multi-secular tradition of opacity, but still, this is too big to go unnoticed.

Published in Macau Daily Times, September 30th 2016

Kapok: Do as I say not as I do

In his first second-term policy address in March 2015, Mr Chui Sai On gave the assurance that consultative bodies would from now on be better regulated. The pledge was twofold: limit the number of consultant positions concurrently held by the same person to a maximum of three and limit the number of years of service in such positions to a maximum of six. A brand new team of Secretaries having been sworn in, the rationale was that if much needed and imaginative public policies were to be put in place, cells of resistance and possible conflicts of interest had to be subdued within these consultative bodies.
When things are decided by the happy few, consultation processes become a life-line. During an official ceremony marking the 65th anniversary of the Communist regime in September 2014, Mr Xi Jinping himself praised “consultative democracy” as China’s unique way of allowing the people to participate in governance. Even if the President’s understanding of democracy was clearly derived from Marxism-Leninism, his urge for a well-established feed-back mechanism coming from the masses was genuine.
In Macao, dozens of public consultations concerning all kinds of governmental decisions have been organised, with varying degrees of soundness, relevance and legitimacy, despite a thorough revamping of the rules in August 2011. Moreover, consultative bodies have mushroomed, totalling now 47 such institutionalised gatherings [I had originally written 46, but forgot to add the newly appointed Urban Renewal Committee] placed under the direct authority of either the Chief Executive or one of the five Secretaries. With 17 consultative bodies under him, the Secretary for Social Affairs and Culture tops them all. These organs do not hold any actual power, but their members do influence the decision-making processes and ultimately the policies themselves.
In mid-March, All About Macau, a liberal-minded Chinese newspaper, came up with the story proving that prominent businessman Paul Tse was actually sitting on more than three such bodies, contrary to Chui’s commitment. Then, the same online outlet published a list of 24 personalities sitting on at least three boards of public agencies and consultative committees. Paul Tse was listed with seven such positions and so was lawyer-turned-legislator Vong In Fai, who was also Mr Chui’s chief campaigner in 2014. Chui Sai Peng, the very own cousin of Mr Chui Sai On and also a legislator, appeared on the list as well, and his name appeared again in the headlines on April 11 when it was discovered that an association he is heading had received important public funding to publish textbooks without going through a public tender. Possible conflicts of interest come in many guises in Macao but often originate in business circles, the Legislative Assembly and these consultative bodies.
Ever since the unravelling of the Ao Man Long scandal, the prevention of corruption at the highest echelon has been advertised as a priority: Chui Sai On’s first “real” policy address in November 2010 was all about “sunshine government” and “scientific administration.” If the enduring results of the latter had been always seriously doubted, the former was somehow being given credence, at least until February this year: the arrest of former prosecutor-general Ho Chio Meng on charges of fraud and abuse of power is now casting a long shadow on the system as a whole.
A conflict of interest – a personal interest taking precedence over the community’s – does not equate with corruption, but in the words of the European Parliament it can be “considered an indicator, a precursor and a result of corruption.” When the secretary for Administration and Justice Sonia Chan asserts that there are less than ten personalities who participate in more than three consultative bodies and that this is being taken care of gradually, should we trust her, especially when the time spent in any given position is not even questioned? What about the issue of patronage? Indeed, the very same Chui Sai Peng sits on a staggering 143 boards of associations! And what about a standing committee member of the CPPCC sitting concurrently on boards of three universities in Macao?
The “small world” excuse is just that: an excuse. After all, the Athenian Democracy was designed for a city half the size of Macao.

Published in Macau Daily Times on April 22 2016