The decision to terminate my appointment was made not by the University of Hong Kong but by an authority beyond the University through its agents.
It marks the end of academic freedom in Hong Kong. Academic staff in education institutions in Hong Kong are no longer free to make controversial statements to the general public about politically or socially controversial matters. Academic institutions in Hong Kong cannot protect their members from internal and outside interference.
If there is still any doubt of the advancement of “One Country, One System” in the territory, my case should be able to remove it.
I am very grateful to the University of Hong Kong for nurturing me as a law student, a law teacher, a legal researcher and a guardian of the rule of law. I am heart-broken to witness the demise of my beloved university.
Yet, I will continue my research and teaching on the rule of law in another capacity. My fight for Hong Kong’s rule of law also will not stop.
I have the confidence to see the rebirth of a free HKU in the future.
The Central Liaison Office alleged that I am suspected of having breached the law for coordinating the primary elections of the Democratic Camp. I must state unequivocally that this allegation is non-sense.
In the past few years, what I had done were to urge the Central Government to fulfil the promise of universal suffrage in the Basic Law as soon as possible.
In the deliberation of the coordination process of the primary elections of the Democratic Camp, participants agreed that the Legislative Council would exercise constitutional powers authorized by the Basic Law, including the power to veto the budget put forward by the HKSAR Government, to make the HKSAR Government accountable. These are arrangements of the relationships between the executive and legislative authorities provided in the Basic Law. In no way that any unlawful means would be involved.
It is absurd for alleging this as subverting the state. Also, the allegation ignores the clear wordings of the Basic Law.
The Hong Kong Macau Office alleged that the primary elections had limited the right and freedom of a person to run in an election. This allegation is unfounded. The primary elections were organized by the civil society of Hong Kong using local resources, allowing Hong Kong citizens to freely participate and elect persons sharing similar political beliefs to represent them in the coming official elections. For those who joined the primary elections, they make their decision to run or not run in the official election independently. They are not under any form of coercion.
I hope that the Central Government can see that these six hundred and ten thousand Hong Kong people have only used a peaceful and rational way to express their views through voting. If even they could be condemned as breaching the law, it will make governance even more difficult in the future and will provoke even more radical protests. If they have not contravened any law, then any person assisting them in voting would also not be unlawful.
沒有留言:
張貼留言