CUHK's Student Union Disbands

CUHK's student union members voted to disband today

 

Another group has disbanded after falling afoul with the Hong Kong authorities. The Chinese University of Hong Kong's student union will dissolve eight months after the school's management cut ties with the group, citing possible breaches of the national security law.

CUHK made it harder for the union to continue

In February the university asked the student union to register through government agencies as an independent society or company to assume its own legal responsibility, suspended its executive members from ex officio positions on all CUHK committees, and also stopped administrative support and collecting student union fees on its behalf.

The moves followed the 12-member union's release of an 80-page manifesto that accused the university of working with police to have students arrested after an attack on campus university guards.

On Thursday on social media, the student union said it sought legal advice that said independent registration was not necessary.

"CUSU sought professional legal opinion and was advised that 'the ordinance does not apply to CUSU' for independent registration. We are now torn between following the legal advice or complying with the university administration's demand," the post said.

The democratic union shuts down after 50 years

The union held a joint meeting on September 10 to seriously consider the matter and a motion was passed to dissolve the body an accept the resignation of its council representatives.

"[CUSU] has been the only organization mandated to represent the student body on campus. Over the years CUSU has upheld the principles of democratic and federal self-government and co-government for students, and dedicated itself to promoting the common good throughout ever-changing times," the statement read.

"For fifty years CUSU existed as an independent student organization whose representatives were elected through a democratic process. It is a matter of profound regret that CUSU is now history." 

Choy worries about other groups

Chinese University political scientist Ivan Choy Chi-keung, who was president of CUHK's student union in 1987, said he was worried about a "domino effect" among other university groups.

"When the front, the alliance and other social organizations closed down one after the other, and many student unions were asked to register independently, I'm not sure whether the universities were making their own decisions, or whether they faced pressure to make the same decision," he said.

"The union was also a platform through which the students' views could be reflected to the university, so its disbandment will affect those consultative processes too."

The Shutdowns Continue Abruptly

Donations for the 612 fund was to stop at end of September

 

The fund that helped financially support those who were arrested or seriously injured during the 2019 anti-government protests abruptly announced it is immediately ending the collection of donations.

Donations to fund stopped today

The 612 Humanitarian Relief Fund made the decision because the Alliance for True Democracy, the group whose bank account it uses, said it will no longer execute payment requests.

This comes after the national security police announced they were investigating the two organizations and ordered them to hand over information, including details of donors and recipients.

"We are deeply conscious of the impact of this turn of events on current applications, and will do our best to look for all possible solutions and relief," the fund said in a statement on Facebook.

The fund is currently seeking legal advice on whether donations made recently can be refunded.

As of Monday the fund said it has about HK$7.2 million in the bank account.

How people are going to continue without this kind of funding is unclear, but it will be particularly hard for those currently in trial or waiting to go to trial and now the money for legal fees has dried up.

City Forum was lively debate show for 40 years

Meanwhile RTHK has cancelled another show which was an outlet for the public to raise their opinions and questions.

Started in 1980, City Forum was a weekly live debate show which invited guests like politicians, academic and opinion leaders to come and discuss topical issues.

The last show was aired on July 18 and talked about the regulation of disposable tableware. It was supposed to start its new season this month.

It had been held every Sunday at Victoria Park or Carpenter Road Park, and in a Wikipedia entry about the show, it says that whenever a pro-democratic politician spoke, pro-Beijing "Victoria Park uncles" would yell outside the forum venue to drown out their voices, or chant, "stray dogs!"

Attendees could directly ask guests questions

But those colourful days were long gone when the pandemic started early last year and the debate was moved indoors. 

On Sunday, RTHK refused to confirm the decision, saying it was an internal management decision, though critics say the decision seeks to silence dissent.

Meanwhile, the RTHK Programme Staff Union warned that cancelling the show would "severely affect" RTHK's fulfillment of its mission to provide "an open platform for the free exchange of views without fear or favour" as stated in its charter.

Chinese University political scientist Ivan Choy Chi-keung said: "Under the new management, RTHK seems to be trying to avoid critical views being aired in programs so as not to let social harmony be disturbed. The role of the public broadcaster seems to have changed to promoting national identity, patriotism."

He added RTHK owed viewers an explanation of its decision to drop City Forum.

Some claim pro-democracy bias of the show

"It is not just another show," he said. "City Forum has been running for over 40 years. Viewers are expecting it to return. RTHK has a responsibility to explain to the viewers what will happen to City Forum."

But maybe Elizabeth Quat of the pro-establishment Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong has the real reason behind the show's demise: "I don't think the public will lose much without the program. The public is not presented with balanced views on the program. Pro-government guests are usually unfairly treated because the host is biased towards the opposition camp."

So the truth comes out?

The host, So King-hang, refused to comment.