Editors: Owen Oi Ming Emily, Cheung Ming Yee Joyce
Design and Typesetting: Aidan Chow
On September 15, 2017, the Executive Committee of the Council met to discuss
the handling of the pro-independence banner. In a high-profile press conference
immediately following, the University stated again its stance against independence
and announced that if the Student Union failed to remove “propaganda materials
for Hong Kong independence”, the University would proceed to remove them.
On the same day, the heads of ten local universities issued a joint statement
to “condemn recent abuses of freedom of expression” and highlighted that
they “do not support Hong Kong independence”. CUEGU is not interested in
discussing the issue of independence of Hong Kong. However, we are gravely
concerned by the University’s high-profile political declaration and the
attempt to restrict freedom of expression on our campus. These are worrying
signs that freedom of expression and institutional autonomy have been compromised
under external political interference. With this concern in mind, we offer
this open letter to the Council to express our views.
Neither the presence of controversial posters, nor inadequacy of the management
of public space by the student union, or the lack of manner and civility
of certain students has warranted the consumption of so much social energy.
Yet, instead of giving the youth space for thinking and learning, outside
political forces actively took the opportunity to provoke and confuse,
in order to assert pressure on the university. Even when the university
administration had several times appealed for breathing space, these forces
were merciless in their persecution, forcing the university to “be responsible”,
equating tolerance to support for “independence forces”.
Under such immense pressure, the Executive Committee of the Council on
September 15 overruled the original agreement reached by the university
management and the students union. Under the supervision of Dr Norman Leung,
the Council Chairperson, Prof Joseph Sung, the Vice-Chancellor, spoke on
behalf of the Council, to pledge that the University would take action
against the banner and to give the political declaration of the university’s
“absolute objection to Hong Kong independence”.
It pains us to see that the University has, out of fear, submitted itself
to political forces. When faced with political pressure, we expect that
the university would unite the campus with reason and integrity in defending
our autonomy and freedom of speech. It is common sense that the student
union should manage and be accountable for the “democracy wall”, that it
is not illegal to discuss controversial political issues, and that we should
be able to debate different points of views even when they are against
the Basic Laws. Unfortunately, the University has failed to clarify these
concepts and values to the society. Instead, it succumbed to the political
forces by labeling points of views that are unacceptable by the authority
as “against the law”.
We also doubt that the Council and its “Executive Committee” has the power
to assert such a definitive political stance for the university and to
force unification of the political opinion of its community. More importantly,
no matter what opinion the university has on whatever political issue,
it should have no right to prohibit the display of contradicting views.
This is the bottom-line of the freedom of speech.
Of the eight UGC-funded institutions, only the Chinese University does
not have any elected students or staff representatives in its Council,
a fact of which members of the university have long been critical. They
worry that under the current political environment, such composition will
threaten institutional autonomy. In the past, except in the appointment
of Vice-Chancellors or major developments (e.g., the Shenzhen campus, the
teaching hospital), the Council has never initiated a press conference
nor directly engaged in the university’s daily operation in such a high-profile
manner. The reaction of the Council in this incident only confirms members’
worries.
The day before the “Statement by Heads of Universities”, the editorial
of state-owned Ta Kung Pao severely criticized the heads of the UGC institutions
for not having yet issued “a ‘joint-declaration’ against ‘independence’”.
Prior to this, heads of universities had independently commented on the
management of their “democracy wall”. The head of Lingnan University, for
example, commented that though he was not supportive of independence for
Hong Kong, he believed that such banners were meant for discussion and
should not be a problem. The eventual joint-declaration of less than 50
words is vague and ambiguous except for the clear stance against independence.
Despite its title, the statement was not signed by any of the heads. The
meek, feeble words more resemble the call of a hostage than a statement.
This political event has greatly exhausted many of us at CUHK. We worry
that external political forces will continue to look for opportunities
to interfere with academic freedom and freedom of speech on campuses. We
are also worried that the event has set a precedent for universities’ pledging
of political allegiance.
Therefore, we seek the Council’s promise on the following:
The future may yet be saved. We sincerely hope that from now on, with wisdom and courage, the university can unite and lead the community in defending and pursuing the university’s missions and ideals.
Here comes the new academic year.
A new beginning usually signifies a juvenile, forward-looking, fresh new start.
On our campus, however, there is little evidence of rejuvenation. In fact,
the tired faces of CUHK colleagues tell us that many have passed a summer
in which no summer holiday took place.
I believe most departments are by now pretty intimate with the TSPP, the
Triennial Strategic Planning Process. Many of us had to summarize, report,
review and make up the future plan of our departments’ research and education
activities, our organization and financial prospect, in a span of 3 months.
For those of us involved in the exercise, the TSPP had taken place of the
summer sun which we so longed for.
For more research grants and better ranking, we also have the Mock RAE.
We had to submit our individual research reports, proposals, attend conferences,
etc., all in a cut-throat race.
Besides, we had to make acquaintance with the “Timesheet”. This new measure
aims at differentiating activities done under the UGC one-line budget and
those self-financed, by making teachers log details of their time engagements
in various activities. Admin staff too are affected as they are normally
the ones having to learn and use the computer system for reporting. In
today’s UGC institutions, is there any teacher who is not busy like a honeybee?
Yet, we all have to drill our brains in figuring out how to make the teachers’
time commitment in various activities “appear reasonable” to the UGC.
All these only add to the pressure on teachers, who have to handle teaching,
research, and administration at once. How, under such circumstances, can
our teachers find peace in properly acquiring knowledge and caring for
our students according to their true conscience? In these blindly busy
times, what is the true meaning of education? How do we pursue our academic
ideals?
Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” ( 1)
Article 137, The Basic Law of HKSAR: “ Educational institutions of all kinds may retain their autonomy and enjoy academic freedom . [Emphasis added] They may continue to recruit staff and use teaching materials from outside the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Schools run by religious organizations may continue to provide religious education, including courses in religion.”( 2)
Article 27, The Basic Law of HKSAR: “Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication; freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike." ( 3)
The first article points to the internationally recognized human right
of freedom of expression without interference. The two other articles concern
the legal rights of Hong Kong’s institutions of academic autonomy and freedom
and the freedom of Hong Kong residents to participate in social movements.
Recently, accusing some university teacher for “inciting the masses”,
a legislator launched an online petition campaign, calling for the colleague’s
university to fire him. Later, 39 legislators of the pro-establishment
camp co-signed a petition appealing to the Education Bureau demanding actions
on the slogans of “Hong Kong Independence” on university campuses.
We are gravely concerned by such interferences of legislators against
freedom of speech and academic freedom on HK campuses. Freedom of speech
is the cornerstone of academic freedom. True knowledge can only be sought
when freedom of expression can be safeguarded. "I disapprove of what you
say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." University is
the bastion of free-thinking. Opinions can differ, debates can be fierce,
but respect must be given for the freedom to speak.
From the Qin Dynasty’s burning of books and burying of scholars to the
literary inquisitions in the Ming and Qing Dynasties and the Cultural Revolution,
we have seen endless persecutions in Chinese history against those who
seek or hold on to the truths. We hope that we have all learnt from history
by now and that we have the capacity to build and protect a tolerant campus.
---------------------------------------
1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, United Nation: http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html
2. The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region of the People’s Republic of China: http://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/basiclawtext/index.html
3. Same as above.
In March 2016, staff unions and concern groups of eight institutions launched
a referendum on institutional autonomy on the following issues:
1. To abolish the powers of the Chief Executive in appointing members
to the Council
2. To increase the ratio of elected members of academic/teaching and administrative/supporting
staff, postgraduate and undergraduate students in the Council
A total of 4,520 staff voted in the referendum, of which 1,235 are from
CUHK. 94.3% and 95.4% voted for the two motions respectively.
CUEGU has pursued the motions with the university since then. The re-organization
came to an abrupt end when the university disbanded the responsible
committee, citing “a lack of consensus” as a reason. No proposal was to
be put forth to the Legislative Council. CUEGU demanded to know if the
university had tried to negotiate with the oppositions after the consultation
last year in order to seek a consensus. Yet, the management only replied
that the Council believed that the opposition was firm in their attitude
and so a consensus was not possible.
CUEGU later wrote to demand that the management inform the university
community about the dissolve but the management has never responded.
▲ Referendum on Institutional Autonomy
▲ One of the consultation sessions on Council Re-organization in 2016
CUEGU received a report from a member on the evening of Aug 15 about a
curious mistake in the new direction signs outside Ho Tim Building at Chung
Chi. (Pic 1) The careless mistake was indeed most untimely as the new cohort,
unfamiliar with the campus, would be relying on the signs. CUEGU immediately
informed the relevant units the next morning. Thanks to the speedy response
of the Transport Office and the EMO, the signs were corrected that afternoon.
Small changes can be big improvements. Should you encounter any problems
in campus facilities or have any suggestions for such, you are most welcome
to contact us!
▲ Pic 1: Location (brown arrow)
Happy Birthday!
Most of the holidays are for others: Dragon Boat Festival for Qu Yuan
the patriot, others for Christ, for the Buddha, for the Handover and the
national day, etc. But on your own birthday, you have to work as usual.
In recent years, to promote work-life balance, some corporations have
offered special leaves to their staff on top of the statutory leaves. These
have included birthday leave, travel leave and autonomous leave. CUEGU
proposed birthday leave to the Council Chairperson Norman Leung in our
meeting. According to a survey by the Hong Kong Institute of Human Resource
Management in 2015, 17.6% of surveyed organizations were offering birthday
leave to their staff. We hope that as an education institute, CUEGU can
set up a good example for others in implementing this measure for work-life
balance.
The administration has already agreed to study its feasibility. CUEGU
will continue to advocate for its implementation.
Reference: HR Service Providers Directory 2016, HKIHRM:
http://www.hkihrm.org/HRSP2016_Hong_Kong_Employee_Benefits_Survey.pdf
We reported in March our proposals to the University for rationalizing the reimbursement procedure for staff training. (link) Since then, our proposals have been adopted by the Administrative and Planning Committee as follows
The new arrangement is already in force. Colleagues are advised to check
the relevant guidelines on the Personal Office’ webpage.
We thank the University for accepting our suggestions for the betterment
of the scheme in order to benefit more colleagues.
The 13th Annual General Meeting of CUEGU was conducted on August 18, 2017. The meeting appointed Ms Law Kit Yee as CUEGU’s Honorary Legal Consultant. The meeting also elected representatives to The Confederation of Tertiary Institutes Staff Unions. Scrutinized by Yeung Wing-yee and Wan Yuk-man, the election results are as follows:
Representative to The Confederation of Tertiary Institutes Staff Unions (CTISU)
Nominee | Endorse | Not Endorse | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | CHO Alan | 39 vote | 0 vote |
2 | LAU Sin-nga Ann | 39 vote | 0 vote |
3 | OWEN Oi-ming Emily | 38 vote | 0 vote |
Exco member Wan Yuk-man and Treasurer Cheng Siu-shan have resigned from the exco as Mr Wan retired and Ms Cheng left the university. In gratitude for their years of dedicated service and valuable contributions, the Union took the opportunity to present them with a Certificate of Appreciation on this occasion. (Ms Owen Oi-ming has taken up the office of Treasurer upon an election by and among the Exco members held in the September Exco meeting.)
▲ Ms Law Kit-yee was appointed as CUEGU's Honorary Legal Consultant.
▲ A Certificate of Appreciation was presented to Miss Cheng Siu-shan.
▲ Mr Wan Yuk-man received his Certificate of Appreciate.
A talk on MPF was conducted at the AGM. Representatives from the fund management companies Fidelity and Allianz spoke on the Default Investment Strategy (DIS) scheme and other tips for the management of MPF accounts and answered members’ questions on MPF and the Superannuation Scheme .
▲ One of the representatives from the fund management companies
September 2017 was special for the CUEGU handmade soap class.
In the past year, we have seen ruthless persecutions of social activists
by the Department of Justice led by Rimsky Yuen, Secretary for Justice.
The DoJ’s applications for sentence review have led to immediate imprisonment
of young activists who were already serving their community service order
or were on suspended sentence. In August, the Court of Appeal first sentenced
the 13 young activists against the North East New Territories plan to 8
to 13 months of jail and then the Civic Square trio to 6 to 8 months of
imprisonment. The disproportionate sentences and manner of the DoJ’s appeals
have sparked wide criticism among observers.
They were in the minds of the colleagues-classmates of the handmade soap
class, who, when making the Mid-autumn “round moon soap”, thought of how
these young people could not reunite with their family in this Mid-autumn
Festival. The class thus organized to make these festive soaps for the
activists and their families, so to express their well wishes and thoughts.
Seven classmates with teacher Teny Yau made over a dozen trays of these
soaps. Pomelo essence is added to these the round moon soaps. According
to Chinese custom, pomelo leave purifies evil spirits and bad luck.
Seven artisans working together meant confusion. Shaping the “moon” in
the soap was harder than Sisyphus’ struggle with the boulder! The results
“moons” were all in different styles and shapes. The remaining mixture
was used in a rainbow soap. We enjoyed great solidarity during the session
from our common wish to send the best to those in jail.
By the time this newsletter is in your hand, the soap should also have
finished curing and will be in the hands of the families of the prisoner
of conscience. Our hearts are with those who suffer because of their quest
for justice.
Acknowledgement:
Teny Yau for instruction and preparation of materials.
Soap making: Tina Cu, S. Y. Fong, Alexandra Lau, Esther Ho, Julie
Chui, Sandy Hoi, Vivian Yin-ha Chan Donation for purchase of materials:
Ms Teny Yau, Prof Maria Tam, Dr Sandy Hoi, Dr Vivian Yin-ha Chan
▲ The soap!
Two decades ago, the Hong Kong SAR Government abolished the laws on collective
bargaining, leaving workers without any rights in collective bargaining.
As a result, workers are used as “scapegoats” and sacked during recessions,
seldom rewarded for economic prosperity. We are subject to employers’ bullying
and unfair treatment at workplace.
HKCTU is now organizing a series of actions to address this issue. Firstly,
we urge our fellow affiliates and their members to sign the petition, namely
“Statement on the 20th Anniversary of the Abolition of Collective Bargaining
Law, Call to Action: Workplace Democracy”. This petition would be published
in late October in the newspaper and we are now raising fund for its publication.
Secondly, trade union representatives from different sectors would start
a 30-hour hunger strike at 10am on 28th October, to protest against the
abolition of collective bargaining law 20 years ago. On 29th October, a
large-scale march to call for the reintroduction of the law would be held.
Your support and participation is most essential, to demonstrate the strength
of independent labour movement in Hong Kong.
Details of Actions: