Elections

Section 1	Delineation of DCCs
Section 2	The Guidelines and the Regulations (A) The Proposed Guidelines (B) The Regulations (C) The Guidelines
Section 3	Nominations Advisory Committees
Section 4	Nomination of Candidates
Section 5	Polling Arrangements (A) Polling Stations (B) No Canvassing Zone and No Staying Zone (C) The Chop
Section 6	Counting Arrangements

3.1

For the first DC election, there were to be 390 DCCs and each DCC was to return one elected member. In accordance with the criteria set out in the EAC Ordinance, the EAC provisionally delineated the 390 DCCs and consulted the public on the proposals for a period of four weeks from 22 March to 17 April 1999. After the public representations had been fully taken into account, the EAC reported to the Chief Executive with its recommendations on the delineation on 25 May 1999. The recommendations were endorsed by the Chief Executive in Council and the EAC's report was tabled at the LegCo. The public representations on the provisional recommendations, the reasons for the recommendations and the maps showing the demarcation of the boundaries of the 390 DCCs can be found in the EAC's report of 25 May 1999.

3.2	On 12 April 1999, the EAC invited members of the public, through media advertisements and conferences, to make written representations on the proposed Guidelines on election-related activities in respect of the 1999 DC election ("the proposed Guidelines") within a period of 30 days from 12 April 1999 to 11 May 1999 and to make oral representations at a public forum held on 3 May 1999.
3.3	Copies of the proposed Guidelines were made available for collection at the 18 District Offices and at the REO. Moreover, arrangements were made to send the proposed Guidelines or particular chapters of them to organisations which might have special interest on the subjects. These organisations included the Legislative Council ("LegCo"), the Provisional Municipal Councils, the Provisional District Boards, political parties or bodies, mass media companies, tertiary and post-secondary academic institutions and building management organisations.
3.4	At the close of the consultation period on 11 May 1999, the EAC received a total of 28 written representations. The major issues of concern raised at the pubic forum on 3 May 1999 were similar to those contained in the written representations. Most of the views received related to the major new features suggested in the proposed Guidelines, namely, the use of a chop with a "O" to mark the ballot papers, the format of the voter register, no canvassing zones ("NCZs"), the timing of deposit of copies of election advertisements, the restriction imposed on media personalities running for the election and the use of loudspeakers.

2.5

Having carefully considered the public representations, the EAC made the Electoral Affairs Commission (Nomination Advisory Committees (District Councils)) Regulation ("EAC (NAC (DC)) Reg") and the Electoral Affairs Commission (Electoral Procedure) (District Councils) Regulation ("EAC (EP) (DC) Reg) which were gazetted on 7 May and 4 June 1999 respectively. The EAC (EP) (DC) Reg incorporated the following major improvement measures which the EAC had adopted after taking into account the public views expressed on the proposed Guidelines: (a) the marking of ballot papers and the counting of votes would be made simpler in that a chop with a "Tick" would be used to mark the ballot papers; (b) the privacy of personal data would be further protected in that only the name, address and constituency of an elector would be published on the register for the DC election for public inspection - the identity card number and sex would no longer be made public; (c) the canvassing within a NCZ would be slightly relaxed to allow door-to-door canvassing on the storeys above or below street level in buildings within the NCZ except the building housing the polling station; and (d) the requirement for candidates to deposit copies of their election advertisements ("EAs") with the Returning Officers ("ROs") would be relaxed in that the deposit could be made within seven days after, instead of before, the EAs were displayed. The two regulations were passed by the LegCo on 16 June and 7 July 1999 respectively without amendment.

3.6	Shortly after the passage of the two regulations by the LegCo, the EAC published the final version of the Guidelines on 13 September 1999. Apart from the new statutory features mentioned in paragraph 3.5 above, these Guidelines also contained the following non-statutory measures which had been modified as a result of the public representations on the proposed Guidelines: (a) presenters or regular contributors and regular columnists who were candidates should not appear in any programme in their normal roles or contribute articles during election campaigns after the commencement of the nomination period; and (b) candidates should not use loudspeakers in electioneering between 9:00 pm and 9:00 am.
3.7	The Guidelines explained in simple language the important provisions of the EAC (EP) (DC) Reg, major provisions of other electoral laws and various guidelines and regulations laid down by the EAC regarding election-related activities of candidates and their agents. They were comprehensive and covered as many aspects relating to the 1999 DC election as possible so that the user could always refer to them for guidance whenever he/she had doubts and questions on electoral arrangements. To implement a recommendation suggested in the review of the 1998 LegCo general election, an index was added to the Guidelines to facilitate the user's easier reference and faster access to information.
3.8	Copies of the Guidelines were expeditiously sent to the parties concerned - the LegCo, Provisional Municipal Councils, Provisional District Boards, various organisations, members of the media, tertiary institutions, schools, building management companies, Mutual Aid Committees ("MACs") and Owners Corporations ("OCs") - so as to give them ample time to familiarize themselves with the Guidelines before the nomination period commenced on 7 October 1999. Sufficient copies, in both book form and CD-ROM format, were also made available for distribution to members of the public at District Offices and the REO. The Guidelines were also uploaded onto the EAC homepage for easy reference by members of the public through the internet.

3.9

Five Nominations Advisory Committees ("NACs") were appointed, and their appointments were gazetted on 4 June 1999 and 16 July 1999 respectively. The NACs provided advisory service on the eligibility for nomination as candidates, to prospective candidates as well as ROs. Each NAC was a legal practitioner with no less than 10 years of practising experience, namely, Mr Lawrence LOK Ying-kam, SC, Mr WONG Ching-yue, SC, Mr HO Bing-kwan, Mr Peter LO Chi-lik and Mr Anson KAN Kam-choy. Their tenure was from 4 June to 24 October 1999. During this period, 10 applications for the NACs' advice were received from prospective candidates and four from ROs.

3.10

During the nomination period from 7 to 20 October 1999, the ROs received a total of 800 nominations of candidates. Of these 800 nominated candidates: (a) one withdrew his candidature before the close of nomination; (b) one was ruled invalidly nominated by the RO on the advice of the NAC; (c) 76 who had been ruled validly nominated were returned uncontested; and (d) the remaining 722 were ruled validly nominated. They were to contest in 314 DCCs. The candidate whose nomination was ruled invalid in (b) above, namely, Ms LIN Shui-lin of the Fung Chui Constituency in the North District, initiated an election petition to the High Court on 20 January 2000. She alleged that the RO had wrongly decided that she was not ordinarily resident in Hong Kong during the three years immediately preceding the nomination. The matter is in the hands of the Court.

3.11

For each of the DCCs, there would be at least one polling station. The bigger the area, or the larger the number of electors covered by a DCC, the more polling stations would be provided. During the REO's search for suitable polling stations, information on development in various areas and the inputs from the District Officers, particularly on local characteristics, were obtained and carefully considered. By a notice published in the Gazette on 17 September 1999, the Chief Electoral Officer ("CEO") designated a total of 539 polling stations for the 390 DCCs. On the polling day on 28 November 1999, only 432 polling stations in 314 DCCs were open for operation - the remaining 107 polling stations needed not be used because they were located in the uncontested DCCs. Over 9,000 civil servants were recruited to man these 432 polling stations.

3.12

As in the case of the 1998 LegCo elections, the NCZ and the no staying zone ("NSZ") schemes, which had proven successful in maintaining a smooth and safe passage for electors and in ensuring that electors would not be unduly harassed on their way to polling stations, were adopted for the 1999 DC election, with modification as stated in paragraph 3.5 (c) above. The NCZ and NSZ in respect of a polling station were designated by the ROs concerned after taking into consideration the location of the polling station concerned and the local geographical conditions. The candidates concerned were notified of the locations of these zones with sketch maps well beforehand. On the polling day, the RO was required to display a notice showing the areas of the NCZ and the NSZ at or near the polling station. With the exception of para. 3.5(c) above, all canvassing activities were strictly prohibited in an NCZ and no person was allowed to stay or loiter in an NSZ. The Presiding Officers ("PROs") were empowered to keep order in these zones.

3.13	For the first time in the history of election in Hong Kong, a chop with a "Tick" was used to mark the ballot paper instead of a pen as in previous elections. The EAC considered that it would provide greater convenience to the electors and make voting simpler.
3.14	The idea of using a chop stemmed from past experience which revealed that a considerable number of votes had to be ruled invalid because many electors had used the pen in their own individual way to indicate their choice of candidate instead of writing a "Tick" as required. The use of the chop provided a uniform means for marking the ballot paper. It was expected that the chance of making dubious markings on the ballot paper would be minimized and the number of questionable or invalid ballot papers would hence be reduced. Indeed, the chop did achieve what was expected - only 0.08% of the total number of ballot papers were found to be void for uncertainty as compared with 0.17% in 1994 District Board ordinary election. A full analysis of the rejected ballot papers in respect of the 1999 DC election is at Appendix II. This reduction in the number of questionable or invalid ballot papers helped shorten the time spent in the counting as it had substantially eliminated the delay that would otherwise be caused by the lengthy process of determination of questionable votes. The chop was designed to facilitate the visually impaired in using it for casting their vote. It was orange and black in colour and was neutral in the sense that it would not be associated with the colours representing any political organisation whose members participated in the election.
3.15	As the use of the chop was the first of its kind in elections, the REO conducted a series of tests to ensure its workability and durability. The tests showed that it only took a couple of seconds for the ink of the chop mark on the paper to dry up and the chop could last for about 2,000 applications. To ensure an adequate stock for use on the polling day, about 30,000 chops were ordered. Feedback obtained from the electors, candidates and polling and counting staff alike indicated that the chop was well received.

3.16	The EAC decided that counting of votes was to be carried out in a counting station in each of the 18 Districts. A working group was set up in the REO for working out the detailed procedures in consultation with the ROs. The venue to be designated as the counting station in each District was identified in consultation with the RO concerned. The staffing requirements were worked out on the basis of the number of DCCs and the number of electors in the District. Over 1,000 civil servants were recruited as counting staff.
3.17	A general briefing session was organised for all counting staff on 11 November 1999. In addition, to better familiarize the counting staff with the details of the counting process and to enable them to gain hands-on experience, as from 12 November 1999 a half-day mock counting session was separately organised for each of the 18 district counting teams. The ROs and Assistant Returning Officers ("AROs") also attended these mock counting sessions. Videotapes were produced and distributed to the counting staff as reference material. The general feedback was that the mock counting exercise was useful in that the Counting Supervisors gained insight into the problems which might possibly crop up during the counting process, and conceived ideas of how to better plan, organise, and supervise the actual counting work.
3.18	Another important aspect of the preparation work was to set up the district counting stations before the polling day. The layout of each of the district counting stations had been drawn up by the ROs and agreed by the REO. All district counting stations were set up before 8:00 pm on 27 November 1999, ready for the task that would be triggered off after the polling ended at 10:30 pm on 28 November 1999. The substantial resources devoted to making the counting arrangements paid off when the counting of over 810,000 votes was smoothly and satisfactorily completed at 1:30 pm on 29 November 1999.