A century-old university weakened by political struggles

Editorial : 
A century-old university weakened by political struggles


【明報專訊】THE COUNCIL of the University of Hong Kong has rejected the recommendation to appoint Johannes Chan, the former Dean of the university's Faculty of Law, as a Pro-Vice-Chancellor of the university. The issue might have come to an end, but Hong Kong as a whole has paid dearly. First, the university has been severely weakened by the turmoil. Second, the international community is likely to form a negative impression about Hong Kong's academic freedom and the autonomy of its educational institutions. Furthermore, there are a lot of signs showing that different political forces have been involved in the affair. They have turned the university into their battleground.

The Council, in accordance with the principle of confidentiality, did not release an official explanation for rejecting Chan's appointment. However, Billy Fung, the HKU Student Union president and student representative to the Council, has breached confidentiality by disclosing some of the comments made by Council members. If what Fung said is true, it will mean that the Council does not have any convincing arguments to support their rejection of Chan's appointment. No doubt Fung's breach of confidentiality is itself a controversial action, and he might be punished by the Council. However, his unofficial account has brought to light the thinking of some Council members.

The Search Committee, which was led by the university's Vice-Chancellor, recommended five individuals for the posts of Pro-Vice-Chancellors. Johannes Chan was one of them. The other four individuals have all received their appointments and are carrying out their duties. True, the HKU Council has the power to make a better arrangement regarding the appointment of Johannes Chan. However, if Chan has failed to get the job just because he does not have a doctorate or his academic achievement is not up to standard, this will mean that the Search Committee might have failed its tasks. It is because, if a doctorate and a solid academic background are the prerequisites of the job, Chan should not have been recommended for the job in the first place. And there is a Council member who claimed that Johannes Chan did not send him regards after he tripped and fell. If this was one of the reasons why Chan was denied the post, most people will be left speechless or be stumped for words.

In fact, by rejecting the appointment of Chan as a Pro-Vice-Chancellor, the HKU Council has mounted a challenge to the authority of the Vice-Chancellor. It is because the Search Committee was led by the Vice-Chancellor. Though the Council is the organisation that has the final say in the university, its focus should be on the university's long-term strategy. The Vice-Chancellor, on the other hand, should be responsible for its routine operation. This incident has the effect of redrawing the line between the power and duties of the Vice-Chancellor and those of the Council. It is worth our concern whether the Vice-Chancellor will be able to lead the university effectively. When interviewed by a foreign news agency, Peter Mathieson, the HKU Vice-Chancellor, said he and Chan's supporters had been under pressure. He also disclosed that his email account had been hacked into and some of its contents had been published by the media. He would not rule out the possibility that the incident was a carefully orchestrated one, he said.

Hong Kong's political situation remains unclear in the post-constitutional reform era. The political struggles that arose from the appointment of Johannes Chan are in fact a microcosm of Hong Kong's political situation. Unless all sides change their mindsets and give up political struggles, incidents of similar nature will keep coming up in different forms. As the powers that be play a crucial role in shaping the political climate, society will fare better if the authorities give up political struggles. The University of Hong Kong has received a huge blow from the political struggles it has been caught up in. It is our hope that the university and Hong Kong will no longer be plagued by political struggles, that all disagreements will be resolved in a rational, tolerant manner and that internal strife will be kept to a minimum.


明報社評2015.10.01：
港大否決陳文敏任命 政治鬥爭傷百年學府


香港大學校務委員會否決任命港大法律學院前任院長陳文敏為副校長，事態告一段落，但是香港整體為此事付出代價。首先，港大歷經折騰，受傷不輕；其次，國際社會對香港的學術自由與院校自主，會有負面認知。種種迹象顯示，各方政治力量介入此事，使港大成為政治角力場。

校委會否決陳文敏任命，基於保密原則，並無官方版本說法。據校委之一、學生會會長馮敬恩違反保密守則所披露的部分校委發言摘要，若內容屬實，則顯示校委並無真知灼見足以使人信服否決有理。馮敬恩違反守則固然可議，或許會遭到校委會懲處，不過透過他的非官方版本，使人看到否決任命的校委究竟怎麼想。

港大校長領導的物色委員會推薦了5名副校長，陳文敏是其中之一，其他4名已獲通過任命，分別履行副校長職務。港大校委會當然有權就陳文敏的任命，做認為更恰當處理。不過，若否決僅基於沒有博士學位、學術水平不符合標準等理由，則物色委員會的工作便有失職之嫌，因為博士學位和學術水平若是必要條件，陳文敏一開始就不應該獲推薦。至於有校委提出自己跌倒後陳文敏並未慰問，若視此為否決理據，相信許多人都無言以對，因為無法理解。

實際上，校委會否決陳文敏的任命，是在質疑校長的權威，因為物色委員會由校長領導。雖然校委會是港大最高權力機構，但是理應着眼大政方針，日常事務由校長負責。經此一役，校委會與校長的權力和管轄範圍區分，校長能否繼續有效管治港大等，值得關注。在這方面，港大校長馬斐森接受外國通訊社訪問時，表示自己及支持陳文敏的人受到壓力，並透露他的電郵被入侵，其後部分資料刊登在媒體，因此他不排除事件背後有人策劃。

後政改時期，政局混沌不清，就陳文敏任命在港大掀起的政治鬥爭，實際上是本港政治現况的縮影，只要各方不改變鬥爭思維，則類似事件將會在其他事態以不同形式呈現出來。政治氛圍走向，權力當局起到決定性作用，只要當局放棄鬥爭思維，則社會順轉的機會將較大。港大經過這次政治鬥爭，受傷不輕；因此期望港大，也希望香港擺脫政治鬥爭的困擾，在理性包容的氛圍下解決紛爭，減少內耗。