The HKU whistleblowing controversy seems to be getting more complicated with each passing day. For those of you having trouble keeping up, we’ve compiled this little summary and done our best to unravel the squabble.
The controversy started when scholar Prof Johannes Chan was barred – and ultimately rejected – from taking the post of Pro-Vice Chancellor at the university earlier this year. The pro-democracy professor told HKEJ that he was unanimously nominated by the university’s Human Resources team back in December 2014 and expected his inauguration in March 2015.
Student bodies and protesters stormed into a university council meeting, however, after hearing that Chan’s appointment was curbed by the government body on July 28, 2015. It was then that council member Dr. Lo Chung-mau performed his infamous “fake dive” that became an instant meme sensation on the internet.
Prof Chan’s appointment as Pro-Vice Chancellor was then officially rejected on September 29 after another council meeting. Billy Fung, chairman of the university’s student union and student representative to HKU Council, was then a naughty boy as he released a statement on Facebook revealing what he said were the reasons behind the decision, breaching the council’s confidentiality regulations.
According to the statement, pro-Beijing council member Arthur Li said Chan’s previous appointment as HKU’s Dean of Law was merely for “being a nice guy”, where two other members accused Chan as being too “high profile” and therefore should not be considered as a “senior manager of an enterprise”.
FYI, a recent poll by the HKU student union found around 90 percent of respondents opposed Li’s appointment within the University “of any kind”, while 95 percent believe that the post of Council Chairman should be appointed to someone acceptable to academics, staff and students.
Dr. Lo Chung-mau, the “fake dive” guy, accused Chan for “not showing sympathy” when he fell (diddums!), and one Martin Liao said Chan’s academic writings have only been searched for on Google Scholar four times in the past five years (ooooh, snap!).
Commercial Radio later released a full recording of Li’s speech (recorded by no-one knows who), mocking Chan as a party secretary from the pan-democratic camp, and said he was very uncomfortable and very uneasy with this candidate.
Another leaked recording revealed council member Leonie Ki’s criticism of Chan, saying he was “overtly and recklessly” discussing his candidacy. She was also heard accusing Chan of “manipulating the press” to coerce others into approving him, reports the Hong Kong Free Press.
Other council members were quick to criticise Fung’s whistleblowing actions. Despite lacking a disciplinary mechanism, the council voted to bar Fung from attending further meetings on reserved items on upcoming agendas. Council Chairman Edward Leong criticised Fung for bringing an “uneasy environment” by his “breach of confidentiality”.
Fung retaliated by saying his council member status was stripped without legal consultation, calling them out for “placing verdict without trail”, and claiming that the council was ultimately excluding people with opposing views.
The university has now obtained a Court Order to ban members of the media from further disclosing leaked information of the meetings, which was quickly met with objections from seven journalism unions. Critics slammed the university’s decision as ridiculous and failing to address Chan’s controversial rejection, and feared such gagging order could potentially apply to all future council meeting coverage.
You got it now? Clear as mud, right.
Photo: Prof Johannes Chan via Wikipedia
Reader Interactions