Occupy Central
Occupy Central is a civil disobedience movement which began in Hong Kong on September 28, 2014. It calls on thousands of protesters to block roads and paralyse Hong Kong's financial district if the Beijing and Hong Kong governments do not agree to implement universal suffrage for the chief executive election in 2017 and the Legislative Council elections in 2020 according to "international standards." The movement was initiated by Benny Tai Yiu-ting (戴耀廷), an associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, in January 2013.
Umbrella Movement
The Umbrella Movement (Chinese: 雨傘運動; pinyin: yǔsǎn yùndòng) is a loose political movement that was created spontaneously during the Hong Kong protests of 2014. Its name derives from the recognition of the umbrella as a symbol of defiance and resistance against the Hong Kong government, and the united grass-roots objection to the decision of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) of 31 August.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
The movement consists of individuals numbering in the tens of thousands who participated in the protests that began on 28 September 2014, although Scholarism, the Hong Kong Federation of Students, Occupy Central with Love and Peace, groups are principally driving the demands for the rescission of the NPCSC decision.
Occupy Central site in an area surrounding the Legislative Council and Central Government Offices at Tamar were cleared 22-06-2015.
Hong Kong reform vote
The Hong Kong government’s political reform proposal for how the city elects its leader by universal suffrage for the first time in 2017 is based on a strict framework set by Beijing. The plan limits the number of candidates to two or three and requires them to win majority support from a 1,200 strong nominating committee. Arguing that this does not constitute genuine universal suffrage, pan-democratic lawmakers have vowed to reject the package, while pro-democracy groups have protested. The government’s resolution was to be put to a vote by the 70-member Legislative Council in June 2015, requiring a two-thirds majority to be passed.
POST OCCUPY CENTRAL - DAY 242
POST REFORM VOTE：DAY 57 (14-08-2015)
POST REFORM VOTE：DAY 57 (14-08-2015)
Full coverage of the day’s events
Coconuts HKFrontline
HKU alumni body to seek proxy support
A group of pro-establishment University of Hong Kong alumni is seeking proxies from other graduates to support its claim that academic freedom and institutional autonomy are the absolute bedrock of higher education.
However, the 54-member group fears it may not win sufficient support as the pro-democracy alumni groups will also be making representations at the extraordinary general meeting of the HKU convocation on September 1.
The pro-establishment group, "Supporting 10 deans' joint statement," published its views "Alma mater was pulled into political turbulence, makes us heartbroken" in three Chinese newspapers yesterday.
It supports the stance taken by 10 deans in defense of the council delay in appointing a pro vice chancellor.
Convener Lawrence Pang Wang-kee called on the alumni to submit their proxies to the group to support its motion and to vote down two motions tabled by two pro-democracy alumni groups.
Pang said the group is mentally prepared to lose.
"We have no political party behind us and we won't have many proxies ... but we need to voice out."
Mak Tung-wing, deputy convener of one of the pro-democracy groups, "HKU Last Line Defense," described the Pang statement as ridiculous.
Mak, the 1987 Students' Union president, said most of his members have no political backgrounds.
Hong Kong should focus on post-2047 discussion – LegCo President Jasper Tsang
President of the Legislative Council Jasper Tsang Yok-sing has asked the public to focus their attention on discussions over Hong Kong’s future after 2047 amid an increasingly polarised society.
Tsang said in an interview with AM730: “Discussing what will happen to Hong Kong after 2047 is not a far-fetched issue, given that there are only 30 years left.” He hoped that Hongkongers could seize the opportunity and examine how the territory could move on after 2047.
Tsang proposed that, similar to how the Basic Law was drafted, “a broadly representative consultative committee” that is recognised by the government could be set up in order to discuss the issue.
According to the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s “previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years,” meaning that territory’s mini-constitution will only exist until 2047 based on the current arrangements.
Jasper Tsang Yok-sing. Photo: GovHK.
However, Tsang recognised that the current political environment is nonconductive to the discussion.
“Deng Xiaoping said then: ‘After 50 years there would be even less need to change’. Looking at it now, the prospect [of Hong Kong] does not seem this way,” Tsang said.
“A portion of Hongkongers seem to be strongly resisting ‘one country, two systems’, or excluding the central government meddling of Hong Kong. The central government is doing what it can to prevent Hong Kong’s ‘one system’ from going out of control and are looking into how to strengthen the central government’s complete rule over Hong Kong.”
Tsang also noted that the Hong Kong public and members of the pro-Beijing camp consider the discussion meaningless at the moment. “Following the political reform debate that has greatly polarised society and caused a strong sense of antagonism between the pan-democrats and the central government, how is this the time to discuss 2047?”
Jasper Tsang Yok-sing. Photo: Apple Daily.
However, Tsang said that views of some pro-Beijing scholars, who said Hongkongers are not patriotic enough and misunderstood the “One Country, Two Systems” principle are futile. “The more you criticise, the more [Hong Kong] people would turn against you. Hongkongers would not ‘reform themselves and become patriotic’ just because [Beijing] criticised them.”
Tsang has announced that he will not run as a legislator next year. He is currently organising a think tank focusing on the post-2047 issue.
Student leader Joshua Wong wrote in an op-ed on his vision for Hong Kong after 2047. He said that ultimate goal for Hong Kong is achieving “continued autonomy.” In order to accomplish the aim, he wrote that Hongkongers must first have the right to determine the city’s future.
HKU alumni, faculty and staff will meet on Sept. 1 in an effort to preserve the university's autonomy. Photo: HKU
Alumni call ‘referendum’ to defend autonomy of HKU
Given that the University of Hong Kong council has repeatedly delayed the appointment of the fifth pro vice chancellor on the ridiculous grounds of having to wait for the advice of a deputy vice chancellor who has not even been hired, the HKU convocation is summoning a special conference on Sept. 1 to discuss the issue.
Under the constitution and rules of the convocation, all HKU graduates, professors, chair professors, lecturers, instructors and administrative personnel are members of the body.
During the conference, the 180,000-strong HKU convocation vote on several motions regarding the recent controversy surrounding the appointment of key personnel of HKU and its academic freedom.
Once these motions are passed, they will become the official stance of the convocation.
So as to uphold the academic freedom of HKU, the HKU Alumni Concern Group to which I belong has tabled two sets of motions:
Motion 2:
a. The HKU convocation urges the council to confirm the appointment of the fifth pro vice chancellor based on the recommendation made by the recruitment committee within 30 days in accordance with standard procedures and due process, or else the HKU council must provide justification for their decision not to.
b. The HKU convocation is in favour of reforming the existing council system and amending the University of Hong Kong Ordinance to abolish the arrangement under which the chief executive always serves as the ex-officio chancellor of HKU.
c. If the above motions are not passed, we should then call for an amendment to the University of Hong Kong Ordinance to make sure the role of the chief executive as the chancellor of HKU is of a ceremonial nature only.
d. The HKU convocation should set up a task force to implement its resolutions.
a. The HKU convocation urges the council to confirm the appointment of the fifth pro vice chancellor based on the recommendation made by the recruitment committee within 30 days in accordance with standard procedures and due process, or else the HKU council must provide justification for their decision not to.
b. The HKU convocation is in favour of reforming the existing council system and amending the University of Hong Kong Ordinance to abolish the arrangement under which the chief executive always serves as the ex-officio chancellor of HKU.
c. If the above motions are not passed, we should then call for an amendment to the University of Hong Kong Ordinance to make sure the role of the chief executive as the chancellor of HKU is of a ceremonial nature only.
d. The HKU convocation should set up a task force to implement its resolutions.
Motion 4:
a. The position of the chairman of the HKU council must be held by someone acceptable to both the HKU staff and students.
a. The position of the chairman of the HKU council must be held by someone acceptable to both the HKU staff and students.
Motion 2 is in fact the embodiment of the demands raised by the 1,536 alumni who published a co-signed letter in newspapers earlier in response to the relentless attacks made by pro-Beijing newspapers against Professor Johannes Chan Man-mun and to the continued delay of the appointment to this key position by the HKU council.
So far the council still owes the public an explanation as to why it was not following standard procedures and long-established tradition on the appointment.
It is not a matter of who eventually gets the job but rather a matter of principle and procedural justice, and as alumni of HKU, we are under an obligation to uphold these principles, upon which the century-old reputation of our beloved university is built.
As far as Motion 4 is concerned, since Edward Leong Che-hung’s term as chairman of the HKU Council will come to an end in November this year, we demand that Hong Kong’s chief executive not appoint anyone who is unacceptable to HKU staff and students to succeed Leong, since every decision made by the HKU council chairman, along with his fellow members, will have far-reaching implications for the university.
If our motions are passed on Sept. 1, it means we have a strong public mandate to demand the confirmation of the appointment of the fifth pro vice chancellor by the HKU council in accordance with standard procedures as soon as possible, as well as the reform of the existing system so that the city’s chief executive will no longer serve as the ex-officio chancellor of HKU.
In the face of a critical external political environment, we are deeply concerned that the public might lose their faith in the governance of HKU, which has remained the most prestigious and respected tertiary education institution in the city for over a century.
We are even more worried that what happened to HKU may not be an isolated incident, and that once HKU falls, the government under Leung Chun-ying will continue to get its claws into other universities, and the autonomy and academic freedom on our university campuses promised under the Basic Law will be on the line.
I urge every HKU graduate to attend the special conference on Sept. 1.
If you can’t show up, please authorize another alumnus whom you know well to vote on your behalf.
沒有留言:
張貼留言