ABSTRACT
The advisory system is an important feature of Hong Kong politics both before and after 1997 and is indicative of its broader political transition. In British colonial days, the advisory system, which was characterized by extensive co-option of business-professional elites, was commonly perceived as an important pillars supporting effective governance of the colonial state. While a similar co-option of business-professional elites has been followed by the post-colonial state, the advisory system has been challenged on many policy issues after 1997. This chapter argues that the smooth functioning of advisory system before 1997 was built upon the unique role of business-professional elites in mediating state-society relations within an undemocratic and apolitical context, but after 1997 the mediating function of business-professional elites has been severely undermined by the double challenge of electoral politics and civil society activism. Being a non-partisan administration with loose connections with both political parties and civil society groups, the post-colonial state could no longer rely on co-opted business-professional elites in the advisory system to bridge the gap with society. The failure of advisory politics after 1997 is an important indicator of the disconnection between the post-colonial state, political society and civil society during Hong Kong’s unfinished journey of democratization. Studying advisory system provides a useful perspective for interpreting the broader nature and dynamics of Hong Kong’s political transition.
