Editor's note: Tian Feilong is an associate professor at Beihang University's Law School and director of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies. The article reflects the author's views and not necessarily those of CGTN.

Improving the electoral system of China's Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) is now a matter of great urgency. During the riots in 2019, the opposition proposed "Five Demands" in an attempt to pursue absolute autonomy and upend HKSAR's constitutional order. In the aftermath of this radical social movement, a great number of riotous figures breezed through the nomination review process and got elected in the city's District Council elections in late 2019, forming a dominant majority. 

The fact that these radical political propositions and activities were not effectively identified and bridled by the local election legislation reveals an electoral system that is porous in nature and unable to ensure institutional security for the principles of "patriots governing Hong Kong" and "One Country, Two Systems". Instigating subversive activities from within the city's governance architecture has become the opposition's "democracy" roadmap aside from social movements.

The Hong Kong Legislative Council election, originally scheduled to be held in 2020 but postponed for one year due to the pandemic, is set to resume in the coming September. Can the central government bear the political cost of a "derail" similar to that in the District Council elections? Does the "One Country, Two Systems" model tolerate "non-patriots", especially anti-China forces, seizing control of the special administrative region through elections? Is Hong Kong having absolute autonomy part of the original design of the "One Country, Two Systems" policy? These are formidable challenges facing both the central and HKSAR governments. 

The February 22 speech of Xia Baolong, director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, addressed these questions and mapped out relevant legislative actions, pinning down "patriots governing Hong Kong" as the political antidote to these thorny issues and improving Hong Kong's electoral system as an institutional starting point.

Xia noted that "to ensure the steady and sustained implementation of 'One Country, Two Systems,' the principle of 'patriots governing Hong Kong' must always be upheld". This is both a reiteration and an extension of Deng Xiaoping's historic remarks on the same subject. 

Patriotism is essential to the "One Country" concept in the constitutional principle of "One Country, Two Systems". If HKSAR's high degree of autonomy falls into the hands of "non-patriots," or it follows a subversive path of anti-China politics, then not only the city's long-term prosperity and stability will be out of the question, China's national sovereignty, security and development interests will also be directly undermined. Therefore, a HKSAR that is run by patriots is the key to maintaining thorough and sustainable implementation of the "One Country, Two Systems" principle.

To put it in legal parlance, the crux of "patriots governing Hong Kong" lies in the definition of patriots. According to Xia, one needs to meet three criteria to be deemed a patriot: first, he must be a true defender of national sovereignty, security and development interests; second, he must respect and uphold China's fundamental national system and the special administrative region's constitutional order; third, he must safeguard Hong Kong's prosperity and stability to the best of his ability. 

These core yardsticks, protected by the "One Country, Two Systems" framework, concern both national and Hong Kong's local interests and systems. When malicious forces from within and without Hong Kong try to sabotage these interests and systems by staging subversive activities, the state must assume a protective role. Added to the national security law for Hong Kong, which is an exemplar of the country's protective effort, improving its electoral system will serve as a state-led battle to defend the national system.

Improving Hong Kong's electoral system is a crucial first step to laying the institutional foundation for "patriots governing Hong Kong". 

The HKSAR has a democratic election system that operates within the "One Country, Two Systems" framework, where its Legislative Council members and chief executive are democratically elected. As a major institutional mechanism that underlines the legislative and executive branches of the HKSAR government, election is not just something that falls fully under Hong Kong's autonomous rights, but also a national affair that concerns the institutional and regulative security of the "One Country, Two Systems" principle. 

Within Hong Kong's constitutional order co-established by the national constitution and Hong Kong's Basic Law, the state holds the power to make institutional arrangements according to the "One Country, Two Systems" policy, including setting up special administrative regions and deciding on their systems. 

In this light, improving Hong Kong's electoral system, a step led by the central government, is in line with the spirit of "One Country, Two Systems" and is essential to maintaining the city's constitutional order.  

In a nutshell, the main purposes of recasting Hong Kong's electoral system along the lines of "patriots governing Hong Kong" are to straighten up the premises and foundation for Hong Kong's democratic elections and to address the loopholes in the system through an institutional check-up. This helps ensure that election activities will be conducted in a legal, orderly and constructive manner and that every eligible Hong Kong voter will be able to exercise their voting rights freely and rationally.

As a crucial review and update of the city's democratic system, improving the electoral system will be an institutional milestone for the democratic development in the HKSAR, and "patriots governing Hong Kong" will be its safety valve.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)