一封給港大同學的信
百年港大學生會，榮譽成就毀一旦。
如果你仍然關心港大及港大學生會，請你看看今天如斯不堪的一群學生會幹事。
黑箱作業 渾水摸魚
年初特首小圈子選舉期間，學生會幹事於秘密會議獨斷立場，豪擲38萬刊登「3.12反黑金聲明」，弄得滿城風雨，全城追究。可是涉事者一而再、再而三，拒絕交代，獨斷專行，漠視應有制度，剝奪學生知情權，踐踏學生尊嚴，引起公憤。目賭如斯劣行，遂有同學動議公投聯署罷免現屆幹事會及涉事者。然而，聯署過程遭到百般阻撓，一波三折：主席失蹤、滲亂議案、限制聯署人數、拖延公投日期；再者，公投安排漏洞百出：自我主持公投、安排黑箱作業、縮減公投時段、票站失靈失職、令選票可換、可加、可減。現屆幹事會及涉事者渾水摸魚，蒙混過關，至今仍未公開回應、當初承諾公開的會議紀錄亦從未通知同學可以取閱。
事件最終在評議會主席譚振聲協助，幹事會冷處理下被丟淡，但甫開學，幹事會即一反罷免公投中凡事怠慢之態，轉而光速公投，先不作公開諮詢，後拖延交代，最終引發逾千名師生校友聯署反對幹事會劣行。公投再次在評議會主席等人乾坤獨斷下，錯漏百出，不只出現兩款選票，更有如選票欠浮水印等種種基本錯誤。
昨日，關乎學生會未來去向的周年大選亦遭毒手，同學竟然無從得知周年大選的提名期。評議員要求開會討論選舉安排不果，追問幹事卻稱從未決議，學生索取提名表格被拒，換言之，一切有關選舉提名的消息從未公開，有別往年，今年提名細節未經mass e-mail預早通知同學。
現在，我們連參選的機會都被剝奪。
我們是一群有志參選學生會之士，其中幾位同學皆曾出席幹事會所謂的官方「招莊會」，陳冠康會長更信誓旦旦指會於眾人考試後設聚會，公布一切提名相關事務。但最後卻無一人獲回應，整個招莊會無疾而終。如斯無理的安排抹殺我們參選的機會。
不仁而在高位，是播其惡於眾也。
一年過去，幹事卻無絲毫進步，今天選委會的惡行，完全與當天「3.12反黑金聲明」之徑如出一轍。選委會成員與財委會成員同樣堅持閉門會議，顯示一群所謂學生代表拒受監察力量，更褫奪同學知情權，扼殺資訊流通;選委會更變本加厲，公然拒絕將周年大選安排放於評議會上商討，只求網上傳閱混水摸魚地通過方案。此舉如同當初時事委員會獨斷決議登報八份，先斬後奏，繞過評議會，漠視程序。同學知情權，在有關幹事的阻撓下終蕩然無存。
無獨有偶，當天的時委會由文化聯會會長黃柏榮、內務副會長張楚晞及榮譽秘書沈顯龍等人組成，如今的小圈子閉門選委會議亦是由以幹事會成員常務秘書柯文俊為主席的此四人掌理。閉門會議、繞過程序、鄙視監察力量、剝奪知情權，已成諸位的行事常態。敢問諸位曾否尊重學生知情權、尊重既有機制、尊重港大學生會、尊重百年來苦心經營港大學生會的先行者?
選舉弄到如今不倫不類、缺乏制衡的局面，選委會四人與評議會主席譚振聲難辭其咎。選委會拒絕和盤托出，專橫行事，實為累事之始。而評議會主席一如以往，三番四次漠視召開會議的要求，不肯就選舉安排吸納更廣泛聲音，更令選舉程序墮落不堪。近三份一評議員要求召開評議會，卻因主席一人之見而令會議難行，此實為香港學界一大荒謬。
以往數屆的學生會，所有選舉安排經由評議會商討，以保選舉公正，吸納廣泛民意，而非由三數人壟斷；所有提名期、選舉日皆會遁正式途徑公布，確保每位同學知悉，以維護同學的選舉權與被選舉權，絕不黑箱作業，鬼祟張貼。今時今日，港大學生會卻只成為獨斷幹事與主席的玩物，自恃身擁一權，便無限濫用。
孫中山先生有言:「自己應為之事，勿求他人；今日應為之事，勿待明日。」我們均希望能盡一己綿力，撥亂反正，更新氣象。面對如此不公的安排，我們連參選的機會都被扼殺。如今，正是我們港大同學以行動捍衛學生會尊嚴的時刻。新年伊始，我們在此懇請各位同學可以一同監察現任學生會幹事，重開提名期，確保選舉公平、公正、公開，令港大學生會能真正服務港大學生。
鄧日朗
黃綺文
黃在琳
葉坤杰
蔡漢邦
梁雅雯
周永康
周嘉發
曾頌熙
張家盈
Mandy Huang (罗真)
羅雋
梁呈謙
Bek Khan Mamakaev
二零一三年一月一日
_________________________________________________________________
A Letter to All the HKU Students
HKU Student Union, decades of honor and pride ruined today
My friends，If you do care about Student Union, our dearest university, or the justice and democracy of our society, please do read and be informed of the deeds of the current Student Union, who runs under OUR name, with OUR support and, supposedly, in service of US.
There were many loopholes in the setting up of the general polling, a strong example of such was the allowance of the person who was voted with having committed a "no confidence" breach to have control over the polling. There existed a major conflict of interest. Many people could not comprehend such an arrangement. Additionally, the operating hours of the polling stations were also comparatively short, contrasting to those of previous years. The operation of the polling stations was not carried out according to the regulations. The validity of the statistics from the polling were thus rendered completely unreliable.
Up till date, the Executive members have yet to make a proper response towards the event, neither have they displayed any of their minutes to all the students.
Yet on the first day of this year's semester, the Executive Committee members conducted a general polling voting in favour of the termination of Dr. Albert Chau's and Ronald T Chin's duties, suggesting that they were unsuitable for their positions. This poll was held in a much more efficient manner than the previous. Regarding this new polling, the Executives did not conduct an open consultation and failed to provide any background information on the implementation of the poll. This has led to the disagreement and opposition of more than 1,000 students, including teachers and alumni.
The presence of 2 different versions of voting slips, as well as some without watermarks was discovered, proving the misconduct of the Council Chairperson, who is in charge of overseeing the preparations and regulations of voting.
Their actions have caused some students to suspect that the Union Executives are working in the shadows, disregarding the students’ rights of being informed and involved. Once again, students today were belied, unaware of the nomination period and therefore losing the chance to run for election at the Annual Election, so important as to affect the prospects and welfare of the students in the coming future.
Hence, some councillors proposed for a meeting to discuss on the arrangement of the election. However, when asked about the election, some Executives stated that they were unaware and did not make any decisions. Students were even turned down when they requested for a nomination form for the election.
Furthermore, unlike usual procedures, neither mass e-mails nor publications were sent out or made to inform students about the details of the nomination.
With NO right to voice up, contend against or monitor over, we are now even deprived of the right to know, to observe and to participate.
Amongst us, there exist students who have shown interest in running in the election and have attended the Student Union’s tea gatherings for the recruitment of Union executives. The current president, Dan Chan, made a verbal promise to all attendees during the tea gathering that a briefing of the nomination and election procedures would be held after the period of the final examinations. However, the briefing session was never realized even after the nomination deadline and up to this moment. Those students who went to the gatherings were not at all notified of the presence of a nomination period, in turn unable to run for the election.
On certain levels, what the UEC has done is worse than the Union Finance Committee (UFC), as they outrageously disagreed to discuss the arrangement of the annual election at a council meeting.
Hereby, we call upon students to thoroughly examine the indecent deeds above and the whole Student Union under their grip, in deep doubt of their respect to and acknowledgement of the students’ rights, the Student Union system and HKU, and the unconditional support and toil from the whole student body which they are supposed to serve.
We are convinced that the UEC and the Council Chairperson are responsible for the current disorder in this election period. However, regardless of our persistent requests, the Chairperson refused to conduct a council meeting, as expected, and to gather more opinions on election arrangement from students. Rejecting the request of one third of the councillors to conduct a Council meeting, the Chairperson has committed a blatant absurdity.
In the past, all the election arrangements must and were discussed in council meetings to ensure the fairness of the election. Also, decisions were made only after consulting the opinions from a large student body rather than a few figures. Moreover, the nomination period and election date must and were announced via “formal channels” such as mass e-mails or posts on official websites, in order to ensure students’ knowledge of the nomination and their opportunity to participate in the election.
With no checks and balances and the pressure coming from supervision, HKUSU is manipulated and controlled by these several figures with unproportionally enormous power.
Here, we, as the running cabinet against the previous one, aspire and aim to make some difference, to change this unsatisfied situation and to better serve the students. Yet suffering from such an unfair outrage, we are stripped off any single opportunity to participate, to contribute with our best endeavor and to make HKU a better place.
Tang LaurenceYat Long
Wong Yee Man
Michelle Wong Zoi Lam
Yip Kwan Kit
Choi Hon Pong
Leung Nga Man
Chow Yong Kang
Chau Dickson Ka Faat
Tsang Chung Hei
Cheung Kar Ying
Huang Mandy (Luo Zhen)
John Lo
Leung Ching Him
Bek Khan Mamakaev
沒有留言:
張貼留言