2012 Hong Kong Chief Executive election

Candidate			Born	Party	Most recent position	Campaign	Nominations received
		Regina Ip 葉劉淑儀	24 August 1950 (age 61)	New People's Party (Pro-Beijing)	Member of the Legislative Council and New People's Party Chairwoman (2008–present; 2011–present)	Announced: 20 February 2012 Withdrew: 29 February 2012	Withdrawn
		Frederick Fung 馮檢基	17 March 1953 (age 59)	Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood (Pan-democracy)	Member of the Legislative Council (2000–2016)	Announced: 8 December 2011 Withdrew: 8 January 2012 Lost the pan-democracy primary	Withdrawn

Other minor candidates included Kan Kit-hung (簡傑鴻),[7] Yu Wing-yin (余永賢), consultant of the Hong Kong Applied Science and Technology Research Institute,[8][9][10] Wu Sai-chuen (胡世全), a former DAB member[11] and Roger Chan Yuet-tung (陳乙東).[12] None of them was successfully nominated.

• Rita Fan Hsu Lai-tai, member of the National People's Congress Standing Committee
• Jasper Tsang Yok-sing, President of the Legislative Council

• 
  Member of the NPCSC
  Rita Fan
• 
  Legislative Council President
  Jasper Tsang

Civic Party legislator Alan Leong who contested the 2007 Chief Executive election expressed an interest in standing again but later announced that the Civic Party would not join the election. Albert Ho, the chairman of the Democratic Party decided to run for the post on 4 October 2011.[16] Frederick Fung, former chairman of the Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood (ADPL), also expressed his interest in running for the post, and officially announced his decision to participate in the election on 8 December 2011.

After winning over 150 seats in the Election Committee subsector elections, the pan-democrats conducted the "Pan-dem Chief Executive Primary Election" to decide on a unified candidate for the pan-democrat camp on 8 January 2012. The organising committee consisted of 7 members, representing the Democratic Party, the Civic Party, the ADPL, the Neo Democrats, the Professional Commons, the Power for Democracy and the Hong Kong Democratic Development Network respectively. The 4 co-organising political parties agreed to nominate the winner of the primary election.[17] However, some pan-democratic parties, including the League of Social Democrats, the People Power and the Labour Party, were against the primary election and the "small-circle election" at all. All Hong Kong permanent residents aged 18 or over were eligible to vote at the 74 polling stations; 33,932 votes were cast. The result combined the public voting and the poll conducted by the University of Hong Kong Public Opinion Programme between 3 and 6 January with equal weights. Albert Ho won with 67.2% in the voting and 54.6% in the poll.[18][19]

After Henry Tang became embroiled in an unauthorised building works scandal in February 2012, the field of potential pro-Beijing candidates once again opened up: New People's Party legislator Regina Ip re-announced her interest in running for the post on 20 February; at the same time, Legislative Council president Jasper Tsang of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) also said he was "seriously considering" running for the post.[20] In addition to Rita Fan, Financial Secretary John Tsang and Secretary for Development Carrie Lam, businessman Victor Fung and Joseph Yam were touted by pundits as possible candidates.[15] Tsang's final decision not to stand, after ten days of deliberations,[21] was influenced by concerns about the intrusion of party politics into the chief executive race, and the effect of his candidature (and potential success in getting elected) for the DAB in the forthcoming Legislative Council elections in September.[22] Ip failed to receive enough nominations before the deadline and thus did not qualify to stand for the election.[23]

A televised election debate was jointly organised by 11 mass media organisations at RTHK's Broadcasting House in Kowloon Tong on 16 March 2012.[44] 150 guests were randomly invited by the University of Hong Kong and the Lingnan University. During the 2-hour debate, the candidates answered questions raised by the mass media organisations and randomly drawn guest audience, and were allowed to raise questions to other candidates.[45] The hosts were Joseph Tse Chi-fung of RTHK and Hui Fong-fai of TVB.

Afterwards, public concern was raised about Henry Tang's accusations during the debate that Leung had proposed suppressing freedom of speech by shortening the licence renewal term for Commercial Radio in 2003; Tang also alleged that Leung had said in a "top-level meeting" that the government would have to deploy the anti-riot police and use tear gas to handle protests after the massive peaceful demonstration on 1 July 2003 opposing the legislation of Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23. Leung denied both claims immediately, adding that the only "top-level meeting" he had attended was the Executive Council.[46] Arthur Li Kwok-cheung stated that he had not heard Leung making such remarks during ExCo meetings.[47]

Albert Ho used the platform to demand Tang and Leung to state their positions on universal suffrage, in particular the abolition of functional constituencies in the Legislative Council, and on vindication of the Tiananmen protests of 1989. However, neither Tang nor Leung responded directly.[46]

A televised election forum was held at the Kowloonbay International Trade & Exhibition Centre on 19 March 2012. Unlike the debate, the candidates were not allowed to raise questions to each other and no guests from the public were invited. They answered questions raised by a few randomly selected election committee members as well as those previously collected from the public. The host was Ng Ming-lam, who also hosted the debate on political reform between Donald Tsang and Audrey Eu in 2010.

In October 2011 affairs were publicised involving Henry Tang and Shirley Yuen, Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce CEO and his former administrative assistant, and Elizabeth Chan, Tang's personal assistant in the 1990s; both denied liaisons with him.[48][49] His wife said in statement to the media that there had been difficult times in their relationship and that he has faults, but that she also appreciated his strengths.[50] According to one media report, the revelations caused Beijing to drop their opposition to Leung standing as a candidate as a safeguard against more scandals involving Tang.[41]

In mid October 2011 there were complaints that the Pro-Beijing candidates had not officially declared to run for Chief Executive.[51] Pan-democrat Emily Lau specifically said Leung Chun-ying and Henry Tang were inviting 10,000 people out to wine and dine on public expenses, and that this was unfair and irresponsible when neither appeared to want to run for chief executive.[51] Rita Fan also flip flopped multiple times. While she wanted to run when she was the most popular,[52] when Tang showed his intention to run, she stepped back and said Tang was an acceptable candidate. However, when the extramarital affair of Henry Tang was exposed, Fan withdrew her support for him.[49][52]

On 14 January 2012 Zhao Xinshu, dean of Hong Kong Baptist University School of Communication, prematurely presented a survey result showing candidate Leung Chun-ying with only a small lead (6.5% points) over Henry Tang out 836 people surveyed.[53][54] By the time the survey was completed with the 1000 sample, Leung led Tang by an 8.9% point margin.[53] This caused speculations whether the poll was rigged. On 19 January Henry Tang admitted his communications advisor Lucy Chan Wai-yee had made a call to the Baptist University prior to the announcement of the unfinished result,[55][56] but denied that he interfered with the poll.[57]

Zhao Xinshu took on the blame, and explained that the early announcement was to avoid losing media coverage to the Republic of China presidential election.[58] The school denied having any political stance.[59] Zhao resigned from the school dean position, but retained his teaching post.[53] School staff, students and alumni were dissatisfied with the short investigation, which lasted only 10 days involving 16 internal school members.[53][60] Zhao may face further investigation by the ICAC.[61]

In an exclusive in early 2012, East Week magazine said Leung was one of 10 judges in the 2001 concept planning competition for the West Kowloon Cultural District despite his company acting as a consultant for one of the competitors.[62] Leung had declared on 25 February 2002, that he was in no way interested in the competition, whether in a personal or professional capacity.[63]

Upon questioning following the press report, he reiterated: "There was no business relationship, or conflict of interest. I have already reported the case to the jury committee chairman and government bodies ... One quantity surveyor under a particular professional team asked our company about related comments and information on land prices in West Kowloon. But we did not take any money in return." The contestant in question, Malaysian company LWK & Partners, named DTZ Holdings – Leung's company – as a "consultant" in its competition entry. Leung said that he immediately questioned his staff upon learning about it, and had in fact written an explanatory letter to the jury upon being aware.[62]

As the row continued, the government generated further controversy[64] on 8 February when it issued two statements, one explaining the failure of candidate Leung to declare a possible conflict of interest in the West Kowloon Reclamation Concept Plan Competition, and other that cleared Henry Tang Ying-yen of any conflict of interest relating to his decision to lower wine duties when he was financial secretary. A government spokesman insisted it was impartial in issuing the two statements.[65] However, Asia Sentinel suggested the selective leak of such allegations by the government who then refused to make public all the documents relating to the issue as requested by Leung himself was a smear originating from the Tang camp.[64] Leung said he welcomed full disclosure of all the facts and documents relating to his involvement in the contest, including "minutes of judges' panel meetings." The government said that had written to seek consent from both Leung Chun-ying and the contestant's architects TR Hamzah & Yeang to release information concerning their respective roles in the West Kowloon Reclamation Concept Plan.[66]

Media-hired cranes stooping over 5 and 7 York Road – Henry Tang's residence – following revelations of illegal structures there.

"As a man, one needs to have shoulders and as a public officer, one needs to have backbone," – Henry Tang, 13 February 2012 (statement in response to press alleged illegal structures at his properties)[2][67]

Following media allegations of illegal structures at the Kowloon Tong residence of the leading contender, Tang admitted on 13 February that there was an unauthorised structure at his home at No 5A York Road in the form of a canopy above the garage. He also said that there was already an underground garage at his family's adjacent property (7 York Road) at the time of purchase, which had since been deepened "for storage". He said it was not used as a wine cellar.[68]

On 15 February, Chinese-language newspaper Sharp Daily published a set of floor plans purporting to be of the 2,400-square-foot illegal basement at one of Tang's properties comprising a store room, fitness room, changing room, cinema and wine-tasting room dating from 2003.[69] Tang said the drawing "does not match. [The basement] is basically used for storage." The Buildings Department said that the property was inspected on 22 January 2007, and no unauthorised structures were found.[70] Experts believe that the secret basement standing larger than the footprint of the house was no afterthought: engineers have largely discounted the possibility of building such a large underground structure after completion of the main house. The filed building plan showed foundation piles were driven five metres deep, enough space to harbour at least one storey underground.[71] A media and political circus gathered in York Road as inspectors made a site visit on 16 February: media hired building cranes to gain vantage over the property; Leung Kwok Hung led a protest outside Tang's residence.[72] In a press conference, Tang's wife took responsibility for the illegal basement facility.[73] Tang refused media requests to tour the house. He said: "An illegal structure is an illegal structure. It doesn't matter what the facilities inside are."[74] Tang was widely criticised for hiding behind his wife, and was then under pressure to quit the race.[75]

In a poll conducted on 16 and 17 February by the University of Hong Kong on behalf of the South China Morning Post, 51.3% of those polled said Tang should withdraw.[76] Opposition to Tang was 23.5 percentage points higher one week later.[77] Commentators observed that Tang's self-inflicted damage has embarrassed Beijing and made it lose control of the election process.[78][79]

Leung Chun-ying was suspected of being involved with "black gold politics" after the March 2012 issue of East Week reported that his supporter, Lew Mon-hung (Chinese: 劉夢熊), and his campaign officers met with Rural committee members and a Triad member over a dinner at Lau Fau Shan.[80] Attendees from different camps gave different accounts, especially of the appearance of Kwok Wing-hung, nicknamed "Shanghai Boy", who has known associations with Wo Shing Wo. Denying any personal connections with Leung, however, Kwok claimed he met Henry Tang in Tokyo, Japan in 2002 and held a few photos of him. Tang then lodged a complaint to the police, stating that he felt threatened by Kwok's comments.[81] The case is under ICAC and police investigation.

Henry Tang's claims during the televised debate on 16 March about what was said during "high-level meetings" set off a storm. During later interviews, he elaborated on the situations where the remarks attributed to Leung Chun-ying were heard. Tang said that the disclosures were made because of the public's right to know, but that the disclosures were impromptu as he was angered by Leung's mention of the sofa in Tang's office allegedly used in Tang's extra-marital affairs.[82]

Five former Exco members stated that they had not heard, or did not remember hearing Leung making such remarks during ExCo meetings.[47][83] Tang was widely criticised, by pro-Beijing figures, for breaching the confidentiality rule: Chairman of the DAB, Tam Yiu-chung, said no-one had the right to breach confidentiality rule of ExeCo, for whatever reason.[84] Regina Ip, responsible for the legislation of Article 23, questioned the accuracy and appropriateness of Tang's disclosures, saying that she had "no recollection" that such a comment was made. She also criticised Tang for breaching the confidentiality rule, even should his claim be true. Former Secretary for the Civil Service Joseph Wong also said Tang should be condemned but "Tang [must] justify the breach based on the principle of public interest"[46][85] Senior politician and former Secretary of Justice Elsie Leung rebuked Tang, saying: "The CE election should be conducted in a fair, open and just manner ... If the rule is not properly observed and protected, no one will be willing to join the government or say anything during internal meetings in future." Leung added that "running for the CE is not an excuse to breach this important rule.[1] James Tien, whose resignation from the ExCo forced the government to withdraw the Article 23 bill, said that the confidentiality rule should not be overridden by public interest, otherwise "the government should just make all Exco meetings public".[86] Pan-democrat politicians urged the government to go public on the facts because the public had the right to know what went on.[85]

In response to pressure to clarify the principle of confidentiality, the Executive Council issued a statement that any breach of its confidentiality principle may result in punitive and "legal action" against any offender. The statement, unanimously endorsed by all Exco members, said: "[the principle] must be sternly upheld and respected, and should not be violated."[87][88] The South China Morning Post cites a reliable source that Beijing was "surprised and disappointed" by Tang's violation of a basic principle, and that his chances were over from that moment.[88]

During the Hong Kong Chief Executive election, 2012, persistent rumours resurfaced of Leung's undeclared membership of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Leung constantly dismissed such claims as ungrounded.[89]

In March 2012, former underground communist Florence Leung (梁慕嫻), launched her memoir My Time in Hong Kong's Underground Communist Party (我與香港地下黨), in which she pointed out Leung Chun-ying had to have been an underground communist in 1985 in order for him to have become the Secretary General of the Hong Kong Basic Law Consultative Committee, according to party protocol.[90][91] She also cited Leung's vague remarks about the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre as a clue to his membership. According to the South China Morning Post, Leung's campaign office said Leung was "not a Chinese Communist Party member and had never requested or been invited to join the party."[90] The pro-Beijing Ta Kung Pao dedicated its entire front page of 24 March to attacking the author and her allegations.[92]

Local press has been avidly reporting on efforts of the central government's Liaison Office to rally support behind Leung, but said reports have been creating discomfort for officials. Albert Ho relayed complaints he has received about Liaison Office attempts to intimidate editors and media bosses.[93] Media widely reported that Richard Li had received calls from CLO propaganda chief Hao Tiechuan (Chinese: 郝鐵川) dissatisfied at the reporting at his Hong Kong Economic Journal (HKEJ).[94] Ho said the CLO's actions were creating "an atmosphere of terror" in the territory.[95] The Hong Kong Journalists Association, which noted that the HKEJ had received complaints about its coverage from central government's liaison office, and condemned the "open violation" of the one-country two-systems principle.[96] The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has confirmed these allegations and expressed its concern. The IFJ cites an anonymous senior journalist for a Hong Kong newspaper saying that the Liaison Office had called several times "during the last two weeks" criticising the newspaper for alleging that the CLO had attempted to influence EC members; One publisher who is member of the EC also reportedly received calls from the Liaison Office with coded references to the preferred candidate: in line with the shift in reported preference from Tang to Leung, he said that initial emphasis was on 'experience' and 'temperament', but later switched to 'popularity'.[97]

Local media reported that pundit Johnny Lau, who wrote a critique of both Tang and Leung for the Sing Pao Daily News, complained that the journal turned his article into one favouring Leung.[98] Lau said that his intended piece was entitled "Neither Tang nor Leung is worthy of support". In the piece, he opined that "supporting either party would not be conducive to the situation", but the published version read: "If there is really a need to make a choice, then, let's choose Mr Leung Chun-ying." Lau alleges that his conclusion was similarly distorted: "neither Mr Tang nor Mr Leung is worthy of support. They do not deserve sympathy either" was changed to read: "Mr Tang is not worthy of support. Nor does he deserve sympathy." Ngai Kai-kwong, editor-in-chief of Sing Pao said: "the editing might have been too carelessly done." He said the paper had neither exercised censorship, nor had come under pressure from the central government's liaison office.[99]

The Public Opinion Programme of the University of Hong Kong set up a mock "civic referendum" for 23 March dubbed 'PopVote 3.23' funded by public donations.[103] The voting platforms were 15 physical polling stations, and online voting by Internet and smartphone, and was open from 00:01 to 20:00 on 23 March 2012.[104] Organisers expected a participation of 50,000 citizens.[105] POP also set up polls for students at 155 schools in conjunction with the Boys and Girls Association of Hong Kong.[106]

The servers for the on-line voting at popvote.hk were receiving in excess of a million hits each second since several days before polling began. As only IP numbers from abroad were allowed access, organisers believe it was "systematic hacking" from within Hong Kong, seeking to prevent people from voting. Voting at physical polling stations were forced to downgrade to paper methods.[107] Organisers advised citizens to go to the physical polling stations. Civic Party leader Audrey Eu blamed the attacks on "powerful interests who want to prevent others expressing their views".[108] Pollster Robert Chung said 45,000 people were still able to vote despite the disruption. It was announced that voting times were being extended, with 17 polling stations across the territory opening again on the day before the real poll until 16:00.[109] Two HK males, aged 17 and 28, were detained by the police suspected of hacking the election.[110][111]

There were 222,990 votes cast: there were 85,154 internet, 71,831 Smartphone and 66,005 physical voters over the two-day polling period. The poll results were as follows.[112][113][114]

The PRC leadership has repeatedly outwardly expressed their hope to see "a candidate with strong public support elected smoothly."[115] During the 11th National People's Congress, media interpreted top leaders' support for Leung when Xi Jinping shook hands with Leung supporters, seated in the second row, ahead of Tang supporters seated in the first row.[116] Premier Wen Jiabao's comments were taken by some to indicate a preference for Leung, who was more popular according to opinion polls, although other pundits believed those remarks were neutral.[117]

In the final week before the election Beijing, fearing a deadlock, had thrown its support behind Leung.[118] The South China Morning Post cites a source that central government had informed heads of three Beijing-loyalist newspapers in Hong Kong – Wen Wei Po, Ta Kung Pao and Commercial Daily – in mid March that Leung had won the blessing of the central government. The SCMP noted that the journals, which had scrupulously given both candidates equal treatment up to that point, subtly shifted prominence to Leung in their coverage.[119] The SCMP cites other sources that the central government had mobilised to lobby undecided Election Committee members, or those who nominated Tang, to support Leung. More than 40 EC members who had nominated Tang confirmed that they had been approached by the central government's liaison office in Hong Kong to switch their support to Leung. Other EC members had been summoned to Shenzhen to meet with a state leader,[119] identified as politburo member Liu Yandong, the highest-ranking female politician in the PRC.[32][120]

Among the 1200 EC members, there have been temptation to cast a blank vote to force a new round of campaign.[121] The front page of the Ta Kung Pao on 22 March stated that casting a null vote was "not an option",[122] Its editorial extolled the virtues of both candidates, whilst stating that a blank vote would be no different from the politicking of "the [democratic] opposition".[123] The same day, Oriental Daily News reported that Tang's campaign had all but imploded amidst a flurry of activity by political heavyweights and kingmakers. Liaison Office deputy head Li Guikang (黎桂康) was reported to have met the representatives of the five leading business organisations for one and a half hours; they did not reveal the content of their discussions. Andrew Leung and Jeffrey Lam, two people considered to be the 'inner core' of the Tang camp, were "in detention" for one more hour.[124] Anson Chan questioned whether "one country, two systems" was being upheld, since the central government liaison office was "very busy getting everybody to put the vote for CY".[125] Albert Ho suggested that many EC members were feeling the pressure from the Liaison Office, and feared repercussions for not voting for Leung. He also said that press reports of the Liaison Office's whipping was subject of Liaison Office complaints to editors and media bosses.[93][95]

The Liberal Party declared, with two days to go, that ideologically it was unanimously opposed to Leung, and that its EC members would be allowed to vote freely. Although it had originally nominated Tang, many members could not bring themselves to vote for Tang any more. Chairman Miriam Lau and Selina Chow defended their null vote as "the responsible decision" as they could not with all conscience vote for either Tang or Leung; their internal poll of 1,900 people showed 30 percent would cast blank votes.[126] The pan-democrats reached a consensus that they would not support either of the pro-Beijing candidates. They would either vote for Albert Ho, cast a null vote, or abstain from the vote. And should the election go to a second round, pan-democrat EC members would leave the vote en masse in protest against the "small-circle election".[126][127] The Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions announced that its block of 60 votes would go to Leung.[128] The Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong also suggested its 147 electors vote for Leung.[129]

• Note: Some election committee members belong to two or more categories in the table.

A protest occurred on 24 March at Central involving about 100 people complaining about the small circle election committee representing all of the citizens.[137] When EC members arrived to cast their votes on the morning of 25 March, they were greeted by protesters outside the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre, the venue of the election.[5][138]

During the election 1,132 votes were cast, CY Leung received 689; Henry Tang received 285, and Albert Ho received 76. Thus, Leung was declared duly elected by the Returning Officer.[5][139] There were 82 papers declared invalid for various reasons: seventy-five were blank, four papers were marked for both Leung and Tang; One was marked for all three.[140] After the election result was endorsed by the Central Government of the PRC on 28 March, Leung took office on 1 July, for a term of five years.[141]

After the election results were announced, some of the 2,000 protesters demonstrating against the "small-circle election" attempted to storm and clashed with the police; pepper spray was used.[144] Labour Party chairman Lee Cheuk-yan, who was among the protesters sprayed, said "What I [fear] is white terror, to be upheld by Leung soon after he takes office. People should be aware of that and fight him to the end."[145]

The first big protest after Leung's election took place the next Sunday, in which 15,000 people marched from Central to Sai Wan, where the Central Government Liaison Office (CLO) is located. The Civil Human Rights Front demanded that the CLO stop its political interference in Hong Kong and that Leung Chun-ying should "step down".[146][147] Commentators pointed out that the unusually large scale of the protest before Leung actually took office displayed public anger at the CLO interfering in Hong Kong elections and fear for the office being the de facto ruler of Hong Kong.[148]

Three months after the election, candidate Albert Ho stated that he would file an election petition, based on the false statements made by Leung during the election period.[149] On the televised election debate, Leung challenged the credibility of Tang, stating that he did not have any illegal constructions in his house; nevertheless, an illegal basement was discovered by a local press at Leung's house in June.[150] Although Leung apologised and restated his negligence, his claim was widely doubted as he was a professional surveyor. An election petition should be filed within 7 days of the election, but Ho intended to apply for an extension of the petition period. Along with an election petition, complaints were filed to the ICAC and a motion of no confidence against the CE-elect would also be moved in the LegCo.[150]