Chapter One: An Overview of the Hong Kong Legislative Council Elections of 1991

TLDR: In a celebrated article published in 1955, V.O. Key sought to identify the characteristics of what he called "critical" elections as mentioned in this paper, i.e., elections in which more or less profound readjustments occur in the relation of power within the community.

Abstract: In a celebrated article published in 1955, V.O. Key sought to identify the characteristics of what he called 'critical' elections. There were, he felt, three essential features which served to distinguish these kinds of elections from more commonplace varieties. First, critical elections were those 'in which more or less profound readjustments occur in the relation of power within the community;' * secondly, in such elections, the depth and intensity of electoral involvement would be high; and, thirdly, the election would provide the means by which 'new and durable' political groupings were formed. These criteria have been used to pass judgement on the significance of many elections. Most British commentators, for example, seem to agree that the elections of 1906 and 1945 were critical elections. Key himself felt that the American presidential elections of 1896 and 1928 met the conditions of his categorization. Palmer argues that the Ceylonese election of 1956 might also be included. And so, too, could all the pre-independence elections in British colonies in Africa, which were usually marked by high turnouts, a commitment on the part of the colonial government to hand over power to nationalist leaders and the emergence of a mass party. Hong Kong's 1991 Legislative Council elections were officially declared to be critical elections. The Hong Kong government informed the public in advance of the event that the elections were 'historic'. The spokesmen noted that it was the first time that Hong Kong voters had been permitted to elect some members of the legislature under full adult suffrage. Senior government officials called for a high turnout and suggested that, if the elections were a 'success', they might serve to speed up the pace of democratic reform. There were even vague promises, subsequently re-