The CPPCC annual session opens in Beijing with 2,100 members set to rubber-stamp the Communist Party’s Five-Year Plan — a stage-managed performance that democracy advocates say exposes the lie of Chinese political representation
Beijing’s Most Elaborate Theatre: The Two Sessions Begin
On 1 March 2026, the Standing Committee of the 14th National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) convened in Beijing to finalize arrangements for the body’s fourth annual session, scheduled to open on 4 March. The full session of the National People’s Congress (NPC), China’s nominally supreme legislature, is set to follow on 5 March. Together, these gatherings — known collectively as the Two Sessions — represent the CCP’s annual pageant of ersatz political participation, staged on a grand scale with approximately 2,100 CPPCC members and nearly 3,000 NPC deputies converging on the capital.
Wang Huning, Politburo Standing Committee member and CPPCC chairman, presided over the preparatory meeting, which adopted a decision on convening the fourth session, heard reports on the CPPCC’s work in 2025, and received explanations on draft work reports and the handling of proposals from the previous session. The session’s central focus will be the 15th Five-Year Plan for national economic and social development covering 2026 to 2030, a document that will set the parameters of Chinese state investment, industrial policy, and social spending for the coming half-decade.
What the CPPCC Actually Is
Understanding what the CPPCC is requires first understanding what it is not. It is not a parliament. It is not a legislature. It has no law-making power. Its members cannot vote down government proposals, cannot remove officials, cannot compel the production of documents, and cannot protect constituents from state action. The CPPCC is, in the words of its own official description, a political advisory body that forms part of the CCP’s united front system — the apparatus through which the party manages, co-opts, and neutralises potential sources of alternative political power.
The body was established in 1949 at the founding of the People’s Republic, initially as a vehicle for incorporating non-communist parties and social groups into the new state. Over the decades, it has evolved into a carefully managed showcase of nominal pluralism, in which approximately 2,100 members drawn from officially sanctioned non-communist parties, business circles, professional associations, ethnic minorities, and religious communities are given a platform to advise the party — on terms entirely defined by the party. As Wikipedia’s entry on the CPPCC notes, the body is supervised and directed by the CCP. Consultation takes place, but within limits set by those being consulted about.
The Five-Year Plan: Policy Without Accountability
The centrepiece of this year’s Two Sessions is the 15th Five-Year Plan, the latest in a series of ambitious state planning documents that trace their lineage to Soviet economic management. The plan will set national targets across economic growth, technological development, green energy transition, military modernisation, and social welfare. According to the proposed agenda, CPPCC members will hear and discuss the draft outline of the plan, along with the government work report, the annual economic plan, and the central and local budgets.
Three major draft laws are also on the NPC agenda: an environmental code, a law on promoting ethnic unity and progress, and a law on national development planning. Critics have noted the bitter irony embedded in a law on ethnic unity drafted by a government that has subjected Tibetans and Uyghurs to systematic cultural destruction and mass detention. The NPC, like the CPPCC, will adopt these measures with near-unanimous votes in a process that makes Western rubber-stamp parliaments look vigorous by comparison.
Hong Kong’s Voice: Absent from the Room That Claims to Speak for All
For Hong Kong’s democracy advocates, watching the Two Sessions unfold carries a particular sting. Among the CPPCC’s membership are a carefully selected group of Hong Kong delegates, chosen not by Hongkongers but by the party’s nomination process, whose role is to signal the integration of the former British colony into Beijing’s political framework. Their presence in the grand hall of the Great Hall of the People does not represent Hong Kong. It represents what Beijing wants the world to believe Hong Kong has become.
The real voices of Hong Kong — the legislators who were purged under the national security law, the activists who now sit in prison, the journalists whose publications were shuttered, the diaspora community that continues to speak out from overseas — are absent. Their absence is not accidental. It is the point. The CPPCC’s claim to represent the diversity of Chinese society is sustainable only as long as those who would actually challenge that claim are successfully silenced. The contrast between the CPPCC’s grandiose pretensions and the bare reality of Chinese political life should not be lost on any observer who cares about genuine democratic governance. For comparative analysis of political advisory bodies in democratic vs authoritarian contexts, the Freedom House Freedom in the World index provides annual, country-by-country assessments that place China’s political system in global context. The National Democratic Institute’s China research documents the systematic gap between the CCP’s claims of political representation and the lived experience of Chinese citizens who seek genuine participation in their own governance.
Pik Shan Leung
Investigative & Public Accountability Journalist, Apple Daily UK
Contact: pikshan.leung@appledaily.uk
Pik Shan Leung is an investigative journalist specializing in public accountability, governance oversight, and institutional transparency. Educated at a leading UK journalism school, she received formal training in investigative techniques, document analysis, and media law, preparing her for high-stakes reporting.
She has contributed investigative work to Apple Daily and other liberal Chinese publications, covering government spending, regulatory enforcement, and systemic misconduct. Her reporting relies on primary documents, verified data, and corroborated sources, ensuring accuracy and defensibility.
Pik Shan brings real-world newsroom experience handling sensitive investigations, including coordination with editors and legal review teams. Her work reflects disciplined sourcing practices and careful distinction between verified facts and allegations.
Her authority stems from sustained investigative output within established news organizations and adherence to strict editorial oversight. She follows transparency standards and correction protocols that reinforce reader trust.
At Apple Daily UK, Pik Shan Leung produces investigative journalism grounded in evidence, professional experience, and a commitment to holding institutions accountable through responsible reporting.
