DR Sun Yat-sen, the founder of the Republic of China, once said that his initiative to overthrow the Qing Dynasty and build a republic was driven by his education in Hong Kong. He said Hong Kong was a place where he learnt about democracy.

But ironically, this city, which gave inspiration to this important political figure in history, is no longer a democratic society even in the 21 Century.

So, the appearance of the Anti-Tung Solidarity has surprised a few but is what most people are hoping for.

It is the first of its kind in Hong Kong, pinpointing a particular person - the chief executive Tung Chee-hwa.

The step-down of a leader does not help combat any long-unsolved problems. Yet, the set-up of the Solidarity has given an important signal to the government that people will not stay silent on political issues and re-boosting the economy is not the excuse for postponing political reform.

And the government must be reminded that political issues and the economy can never be looked at separately. To eradicate our economic troubles, leaders should have both economic knowledge and political wisdom. The latter can help the officials to handle crisis.

However, just look at how the government has performed since last year when the national security bill was introduced, followed by the SARS outbreak and the mass protest on 1 July. We could hardly recognise Mr Tung’s political wisdom. Probably he is not born to be a political figure.

What’s more, though the ministers under the accountability system are accountable to the citizens, our “so-called” leader said his ministers are only accountable to him and he will “take good care” of them.

Another reason for the chaotic governance is that Hong Kong people have no say on choosing the right leader. Before 1997, it was not up to us to decide the choice of the governor. But now that Hong Kong is no longer other country’s colony, why don’t we choose one to represent Hong Kong people in order to truly implement the principle of “Hong Kong people rule Hong Kong” ? Hong Kong is a politically mature society that has enough people with political wisdom to rule this city.

As we enjoy freedom of speech and the press, which we always use to criticise the government publicly, one may find it hard to realise that we are living in an undemocratic territory.

The city seems to be lagging behind the mainland and Taiwan in term of political reform. The former is proposing democracy since Hu Jintao took the office earlier this year while the latter’s people even have had the right to vote for their leader since 1996.

“One man, one vote” is not the solution to all problems. But at least democracy is recognised.

Back to the Anti-Tung Solidarity. The society was finally granted registration for a demonstration in Chater Garden after eight weeks of delay. The police had long realised that they were not able to escape from approving the application. But as the chief executive is the “target” in this demonstration, they had no choice but played dirty tricks to hinder the process, though Mr Tung is not the one who pays their salary.

However, eight weeks is an unusually long period for granting an approval. The police have no doubt given people an impression that they are having a political gesture here.

But aren’t they supposed to be politically neutral? The government should better cherish the chance of showing its generosity, as it has been too petty-minded for the last six years.

With the mass protest this summer, withdrawal of the Article 23 legislation and the set-up of the Anti-Tung Solidarity, what will come next?

One interesting question is raised, what would be the fate of the Anti-Tung Solidarity if the chief executive really stepped down one day?

Written by Emily Fan Ka-yan and edited by Winnie Yeung Wing-yin