Respond to University accusation
Declaration of students in defending our University of Hong Kong
On 20th January, students of the University launched a class boycott demanding an immediate review to deficiencies in the University governance structure with detailed reform directions. Direct reply was yet recieved from the University. It was only until the HKU Council meeting on 26th did the University show its agreement to a review. It yet established neither a reform schedule nor details for the review committee. Last year, the appointment of Prof. Johannes Chan to the position of Vice-President was absurdly delayed ‘until the post of provost is filled’, which only ended with a rough objection. With such precedence on hand, it was hard not to believe that the Council would once again play the same trick and delay the establishment ‘until the report of the University Grant Committe (UGC)is issued’.
After the meeting, students demanded an open explanation from Arthur Li, the Council Chairperson, on the reform blueprint and the schedule for the review committee in order not to let a delay take place once again. Arthu Li yet refused to explain anything and huddled up back into the building. When the University alleged to arrange a dialogue, a huge number of police barged into the building and threatened protesting students with pepper sprays. While students resisted with persistence, Arthur Li fled along a passage under the escort of police. It only induces doubt over someone delayed and fled with the sham of a dialogue. Though the University latterly claimed that it would arrange dialogue momentarily, it struck first today and smeared students with statement and press conference. The mutual trust and respect, that has only been feeble, shall no longer exist hitherto.
Prof. Peter Mathieson, the President of the University, condemned students on behalf of the Senior Management Team (SMT) this afternoon, claiming that students’ behaviour was a mob rule, denouncing students of putting his safety at serious risk and in turn advising students to achieve their aims through dialogue. Students’ siege of Sassoon Road had a clear aim to demand a direct coversation with Arthur Li, which only ended in violent treatment. Various times did the police and security blend into students in attempt to instigate and stir up troubles. Security guards insulted and offended students with indecent language; Billy Fung, the President of HKUSU, even got hit at his groin. When politics overriding academia and instigating conflicts, students only stayed and waited under the gale and downpour in the winter for seven hours. We composedly demanded nothing but an explanation, an answer from the Council members in person. It is as simple as that. Students who have neither authority nor power are simply nothing comparable to any ‘rule’. But should what we did really make us deserve such a claim, what is our fear in admitting that? Should Council members find it life threatening to have a dialogue with students in person, why do not you resign and let the more qualified to take your position?
During the press conference yesterday (28th), Arthur Li lambasted students’ behaviour to be under the influence of drugs and repeatedly suggested that Pan-democrats had been instigating the students. The compulsory internship programme ‘Global Citizenship/ Social Innovation‘ under the Faculty of Social Sciences of HKU has been arranging students to work in the New People’s Party every single year. Is this a deliberate arrangement of the University for political party to intervene in HKU? Fernando Cheung, Legislative Councillor from the Labour Party, once claimed that he would be delighted if youngsters cut a little bit of their criticisms to the Pan-Dem. Such is already an evident proof of the inability of Pan-Dem political parties in instigating any youngsters. All university students have their own indepedent thinking, are free men with free will. Should students be really susceptible to such sway as claimed by Arthur Li, he can simply ‘pay us back in our own coin’, making youngsters put money over everything, making youngsters play up to dignitaries.
In retrospect in Taiwan, when police barged into the university during the April Sixth Incident, Fu Sinian, the President of the National Taiwan University, tried his very best to protect students and teachers, negotiating with the high officials from Kuomintang in person, claiming that ‘I shall put myself, my life on the line when any students is bleeding’. Today, notorious police in Hong Kong whimsically entered our Sasson Road campus, assisting the escape of the shameless Council Members. Our University even offered a chance of cooperation with the police and makes video footage available to them, betraying any students who defend this University with innocence and loyalty. At the night of 26th, the police entered our campus with the excuse of ‘receiving report of criminal damage’ at various occasions. Even when putting police accusation of criminal damage to students without any evidence aside, why did the police instantly retreat right after Arthur Li had fled? Is the Police Force subordinated to be his private battalion?
In 2011, after the 818 Lock-down in the University, Prof. Lap-chee Chui, the President of the University, openly apologized to the general public, resolutely stating that ‘Students and teachers are the masters of the campus’ and ‘The University of Hong Kong should always be the fortress of freedom of speech’, who further promised to inscribe these claims on tablets on campus. While such scandal had not been fully resolved, series of scandals were stirred up once again. Institutional autonomy not only means that academic research shall never be politically intervened, it also states that our campus shall never be encroached by the regime. Police are indeed accomplices of the regime. Institutional autonomy shall no longer exist when the regime can peremptorily intervene in our affairs, let alone any protection to our academic freedom. The University daily research and operation has already been externally manipulated, but the troops of police marching and trampling onto our campus on 26th night only brings the situation to lunacy. Should we allow such happening, the regime will only further manipulate and exploit our University of Hong Kong by whim and its own will.
We hereby reiterate:
The Council of the University of Hong Kong must clearly state the time of establishment of the ‘Review Committee on the Hong Kong University Ordinance’
With reference to previous reviews conducted by the University, the ‘Review Committee on the Hong Kong University Ordinance’ must set a deadline for the submission of the report on the reform
The University of Hong Kong must clearly explain the decision of and reasons for the large-scale entrance of the Police Force onto the campus
Prof. Peter Mathieson claimed that he is not acquainted with Hong Kong politics and thus fails to make judgement. But he believes in the bunch of lies told by Arthur Li, letting him smear students arbitrarily. For this we are much disappointed and disheartened. Students and teachers may have different strategies, but in face of the ill-founded smear that goes against the truth, we hereby call on teaching staff and employees not to remain silent. Please fight together with us, and together shall we defend our University.