Lai See | CY Leung and the art of controlling electoral outcomes

We see that our chief executive has been speaking about constitutional reform again. He is reported to have said that all universal suffrage systems in the world can be regarded as "genuine" if they are designed in accordance with the law. Clearly constitutional law is not his strong point.

The discussion of Hong Kong's electoral arrangements have become increasingly Orwellian as the government and pro-Beijing supporters persist in claiming that the proposals for the 2017 chief executive are a "step forward". We are told that if everyone over 18 has a vote this is universal suffrage and is surely a good thing. It might be if you had a choice over who to vote for.

Some people think that the arrangements suggested by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress in its August 31 decision last year does give us a choice. If there are two or three candidates then there's a choice, so the thinking goes. But the August 31 decision has made it much harder for candidates to get nominated.

Previously candidates needed to secure support from 18 per cent of the nomination committee to get on the ballot. Under the new proposals for 2017, candidates will need to get the support of 50 per cent.

Under the 2012 arrangements Democrat Albert Ho was able to get nominated. But if we now give everyone the vote and keep the 2012 18 per cent threshold, there is a "danger" that the likes of Albert Ho could get elected chief executive. So to eliminate this possibility, the threshold had to be raised from 18 per cent to 50 per cent. To paraphrase this in terms of CY Leung political thought: When is a rigged election not rigged? When it conforms with the law.

This whole electoral process is a charade designed to disguise the fact that it's a rigged election in which the only choice people have is which pro-Beijing candidate to vote for.