/若果大學不能捍衞本身的獨立自主，任由政府、權貴指手劃腳，肆意干涉大學內部事務包括人事任命，那學術研究的自由，學者的言論、研究自由都將成為泡影。//
【蘋論】「肥彭」的噩夢正逐步成真！（盧峯）
http://bit.ly/1OYQkAT
http://bit.ly/1OYQkAT
Stand News 立場新聞
前立法會法律界議員、港大畢業生吳靄儀今日在明報撰文，她形容今次副校風波是經全盤計劃的左派勢力大舉批鬥，相信下一個鬥爭對象就是校長馬斐森，「但當這些聲音去盡，港大就會由一批左派推舉的三流『學者』接管，港大從此凋零，而左派勢力才是大功告成。」
吳靄儀指出，掌有權力的校委會當中的濫權校委，一日不除，港大一日難以自保，「如此校委，一日不除，港大一日難以自保。一葉知秋，不甘被奴役，就要預備好抗爭。愛護港大的人，若不甘心百年老校自此淪亡，就要準備長期抗爭。」
料馬斐森將被批鬥 吳靄儀：濫權校委不除 港大不保 | 立場報道 | 立場新聞
前立法會法律界議員、港大畢業生吳靄儀今日在明報撰文，她形容今次副…
THESTANDNEWS.COM
港大教職員發起遊行，不滿校委會否決陳文敏出任副校長，又沒披露否決理據。遊行有近2千人參與，當中逾20人是教授，《蘋果》現正進行直播。
【直播】港大百年首次學袍遊行
http://bit.ly/1yQy8Qe
⋯⋯更多
港大教職員發起遊行，不滿校委會否決陳文敏出任副校長，又沒披露否決理據。遊行有近2千人參與，當中逾20人是教授，《蘋果》現正進行直播。
【直播】港大百年首次學袍遊行
http://bit.ly/1yQy8Qe
⋯⋯更多
直播：港大百年首次學袍遊行
港大校委會否決法律學院前院長陳文敏出任副校長，但以保密制為由，沒有披露否決理據，引起師生強烈不滿。港大法律學系主任何錦璇等4名教授今日發起的「港大教職員捍衞港大自主靜默遊行」
HK.APPLE.NEXTMEDIA.COM
直播：港大百年首次學袍遊行
港大校委會否決法律學院前院長陳文敏出任副校長，但以保密制為由，沒有披露否決理據，引起師生強烈不滿。港大法律學系主任何錦璇等4名教授今日發起的「港大教職員捍衞港大自主靜默遊行」
HK.APPLE.NEXTMEDIA.COM
蘋果日報
他們仗義執言
【法學權威質疑校委取悅北京
港大4院長表態 撐陳文敏做副校】
http://bit.ly/1QPJfAc
【畢業生明集會悼港大淪亡譴責12校委】
http://bit.ly/1JLxEN5
【否決因陳文敏非博士？陳坤耀：憑良心投票】
http://bit.ly/1JLrLPP
#港大 #陳文敏 #副校任命
Stand News 立場新聞
回顧港大副校事件，了解中共/西環/梁營的鬥爭手段。
【否決任命陳文敏】黑客侵馬斐森電郵 左報巧合獲資料發動批鬥 梁振英曾公然引用材料 | 立場報道 | 立場新聞
THESTANDNEWS.COM
港大校委會以12票反對比8票贊成，否決委任陳文敏為副校長。對於校委會主席梁智鴻稱決定是「以港大的長遠及最大利益為依歸」，本身為港大校友的前公務員事務局局長王永平今撰文直指說法是「假大空」、荒謬。王又指校委的決定是「外人多蝦自己人少」，要求這12位校委立即辭職。
王永平：為港大利益說法假大空 請12位港大校委立即辭職 | 立場報道 | 立場新聞
港大校委會以12票反對比8票贊成，否決委任陳文敏為副校長。對於校委…
THESTANDNEWS.COM
法律學院榮譽教授佳日思：校委會卑躬屈膝 用卑鄙招數取悅中國政府
2015/10/2 — 11:53
資料圖片：佳日思，圖片來源：Kenya National Dialogue
【編按：在港大法律學院任教多年、現為法律學院榮譽教授佳日思（Yash Ghai）早前回應傳媒查詢，對校委會否決陳文敏任命感到吃驚，他指自己任職港大以來，從未見校委會如此卑躬屈膝，用卑鄙招數去取悅中國政府，以下為佳日思回覆傳媒查詢的全文。】
I was shocked to learn that the Council of Hong Kong University has rejected Professor Johannes' nomination as the University's Pro-Vice Chancellor. The reasons given by the Council are spurious and totally unbecoming the Council.
I was Professor Chan's colleague for several years at the Faculty of Law at HKU. We are both public law teachers and collaborated on several research projects. He is also a distinguished lawyer who has participated in several leading cases on constitutional and administrative law.
It is absurd to say that he is not qualified to "process" job applications because he does not have a Ph D, Some of the world's leading law professors and scholars do not have a PhD degree. This is the case also at Hong Kong's own distinguished universities, including HKU and and Chinese University of Hong Kong. Certainly in my period at the HKU, the appointments boards usually had only a minority of members with PhDs. When I was law student, first at Oxford, and then Harvard for graduate studies, not one of my teachers had a PhD! Even my own study for the Ph D degree at Oxford was supervised by a professor who had merely a BA — and was acknowledged as one the most distinguished British professors of public law.
To say that Professor Chan has seldom published in academic journal or is seldom the "key author of the publication" is a deliberate attempt to vilify him. I collaborated with him in writing in and editing two books, one on human rights in Hong Kong, following the adoption by the Legco of international human rights, and the other on the decision of the Court of
Final Appeal in the right of abode case, soon after the Basic Law came into force. Chan edited most of the chapters, co-authored one with me, and one on his own, in the first of these books. In the second book, he took responsibility for editing contributions in Chinese language, and wrote a chapter himself. Both these books were well received and provoked considerable debate — as a good book should. Two years ago in a book that I edited with Professor Simon Young, on the first 13 years of the Court of Final Appeal and that of CJ Andrew Li, Chan contributed an excellent chapter on public law. He has published articles in well known law journals, in Hong Kong and abroad.
To say that his achievement is "not even comparable to an assistant professor's", shows the spite and vindictiveness of the Council, and its determination to get rid of Chan at any cost — or trickery. In all my years at the HKU, I cannot remember the Council stooping so low.
Professor Chan has also written about Hong Kong's law in popular journals and newspapers, to educate ordinary people and to stimulate debate — which is also the responsibility of a good law teacher and professor. His involvement with cases in the Hong Kong is also consistent with scholar's contribution to the development of the law. Developing good working relations with the judiciary and the legal profession, which Chan as done with great success, is also often regarded as the responsibility of a law teacher. His contribution to the reform of law is well known, through litigation and research, contrary to the claim of the Council that his work has been of "low impact".
It is also a grave misrepresentation to say, as a member of the Council is quoted as having said, that Chan was elected Dean of the Law Faculty because he was "considered a nice guy". He is undoubtedly a nice guy. But before he became the Dean, he was the head of the Law Department. All the students and teachers had ample opportunities to see his leadership at close quarters. It is because we were convinced of his outstanding abilities, in giving leadership qualities, fundraising, relations with the judiciary and the legal profession, and a vision of the Faculty as a leading centre of legal scholarship, that we elected him as Dean. All the expectations that we had of him have been fulfilled. But there is no doubt that his achievements were at the sacrifice of his scholarship.
As a long serving member of the HKU and now an Emeritus Professor, it grieves me greatly to see the Council turn to these nasty tricks to deny Professor Chan, a distinguished scholar and administrator, the office of the Pro-Vice Chancellor, in order — one must assume — to appease the Chinese government. Soon after the resumption of sovereignty, the HKU and its Governing Council, stood up for Hong Kong's high standards of the rule of law and the rights and freedoms of its people (even to the extent of effectively dismissing a Vice-Chancellor for lack of integrity and taking order from the Chief Executive, himself under orders from Beijing). I wonder whether the Governing Council realises the harm that is inflicting on the university whose independence they were appointed to safeguard. The blow to academic freedom at HKU will also have equally devastating impacts on other institutions of higher education in Hong Kong.
Yash Ghai
陳文敏- 维基百科，自由的百科全书
https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/陳文敏
Translate this page
Jump to 香港大學副校長任命懷疑被政治干預 - [编辑]. 2015年1月，左派報章《大公報》和《文匯報》率先洩密，引述消息指陳文敏可能出任港大副校長，並大篇幅 ...
香港大學副校長任命懷疑被政治干預[編輯]
2015年1月，左派報章《大公報》和《文匯報》率先洩密，引述消息指陳文敏可能出任港大副校長，並大篇幅報導，攻擊陳文敏。[4] [5]
《明報》前總編輯劉進圖於2015年2月撰文表示，一些極具影響力的政府人士曾經致電要求香港大學校務委員會否決由香港大學法律學院前院長陳文敏出任副校長，公民黨法律界立法會議員郭榮鏗亦稱獲悉此事，指出是香港行政長官梁振英和行政會議成員之所為。[6]
《蘋果日報》認為，綜合多名消息人士指出，除了行政會議成員張志剛和中央政策組顧問高靜芝分別向香港大學校務委員施壓外，香港行政長官梁振英更曾經直接致電校務委員及部份香港大學高層人員，鼓動校園內部「反陳文敏」。[7]
港大校委會2015-09-29以12比8票數，否決陳出任副校，但未有交代原因。有校友形容事件令人不寒而慄。[8]
港大校委會本科生代表，學生會會長馮敬恩為確保港大師生校友的知情權，在會後發表聲明，當中透露了部分與會者的意見和取態。[9]
沒有留言:
張貼留言