Law expert explained that China has not broken any promises to Hong Kong as demonstrators continue to express their protest against the Mainland's decision to choose who can run as the city's leader for 2017.

According to Basic Law Institute Chairman Alan Hoo, the Asian giant did not break any promises, citing a common misunderstanding in the law.

Like Us on Facebook

"I think that its position is grossly misunderstood. Firstly, it's not a promise. It is a legal obligation, a constitutional obligation that they put in the Basic Law," he told BBC News noting Article 45 of the Basic Law.

According to Hoo, the very definition of 'universal suffrage' is clearly stated in the Basic Law on Hong Kong where it states: "The ultimate aim is the selection of the chief executive by universal suffrage upon nomination by a broadly representative nominating committee in accordance with democratic procedures."

Beijing interpreted the law conservatively and has insisted that Hong Kong's chief executive must have the favor of the majority of a nominating committee, as China's the Standing Committee announced late in August.

Pro-democracy protesters have repeatedly claimed that the nominating committee is always composed of members largely loyal to Beijing.

By general definition, 'universal suffrage' had been explained to be the right to vote regardless of race, gender, belief, wealth, or social status.

However, Hoo explained that though universal suffrage hands the people the right to elect or be elected, it does not express any right to nominate.

This explanation had been disputed by many, especially those who believe that China owes the people of Hong Kong autonomy.

One of the loudest voices declaring this came from former Hong Kong governor Chris Patten, who repeatedly accused China of backing out on its word by hiding behind legal language that can be interpreted differently. 

Tagslaw, Basic Law, Hong Kong, universal suffrage, suffrage, voting, protests, HK protests, pro-democracy