Early this week, news broke that a candidate for the next Chief Executive election intends to resume the electoral reform process, while pledging to adopt a gentler approach to implementation of Article 23 of the Basic Law.

Article 23 is, of course, the controversial law that would prohibit treason, secession, sedition and subversive activities against the central government. It would also prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in Hong Kong.

This candidate believes that challenges to the government's legitimacy must be clarified before there can be any realization of dual universal suffrage. But one can't help wonder whether such a proactive move is really just an attempt by this individual to "massage" the central government, and this is in order to pave a smoother path for himself in the Chief Executive race.

Assuming this is the case, we can only view it as a logical development. This is because, according to Article 45 of the Basic Law, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong should be selected "by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government".

What we need to understand is that the central government's power of appointment is a substantive power - and not a mere formality. That the central government's power of appointment is substantive is partly because of the high level of autonomy granted to Hong Kong. This level of autonomy is comparatively higher than that of other world cities such as London and Tokyo.

For a start, Hong Kong has an independent judiciary. This is responsible for the administration of justice and adjudication of cases in accordance with the law as stipulated in the Basic Law and Sino-British Joint Declaration.

Hong Kong also retains full autonomy in terms of issuing its currency. The Basic Law also stipulates that Hong Kong can exercise a high degree of autonomy in education. All these freedoms ensure Hong Kong will retain its capitalist economic system, its own currency, its own legal system, legislature and rights and freedom of its citizens.

But areas in which Hong Kong is allowed to exercise a high level of autonomy could also affect - positively and/or negatively - the country in terms of its economic growth, education and national security. This is why Beijing needs to be vigilant in the selection process of Hong Kong leadership, and why its power of appointment is substantive rather than a mere formality.

This also explains why the said candidate wants to restart electoral reform and revise the legislative work to implement Article 23. The central government considered both these things necessary for national security.

What's intriguing, however, is this candidate also gave his word on restarting the electoral reform process for universal suffrage, and rethinking the Chief Executive's automatic appointment as chancellor of the city's public universities. It doesn't take a genius to realize that these promises are intended to rally support from the "pan-democratic" camp.

But it will certainly take a genius to do this with such a varying, if not paradoxical, range of political allegiances! It would be naive, if not unrealistic, to think you can please everyone. This includes those people who are perpetually at loggerheads with one another. But the race for Hong Kong's leadership is on. We will therefore have wait and see what will happen.