Media

The HKU Council (Council), without prior consultation with me and in contravention of the University of Hong Kong Ordinance and Statutes, approved the appointments of several interim Vice Presidents (VPs) on May 28, 2024.  Over the past few days, numerous media have received some internal, strictly confidential emails sent by the Council Secretary to me.   The corresponding news reports even included a series of accusations.  Today (June 10), against my and some other Council members’ will, the Council sent an open message that contained inaccurate content and unjust accusations.  That have left me with no other options but being forced to give the following response to set the record straight.

First, Council Chairman has never consulted my views on any proposed candidates. It is unthinkable and completely false for her to publicly claim that the appointments were made without bypassing me and for Council to state in their message today that the appointment were made with my knowledge. The fact is, before the Council meeting on May 28, Council members received the meeting agenda from Council Chairman on May 21, which briefly mentioned that the meeting would discuss a paper regarding "Interim VPs", specifying that the paper was ‘to be provided’.  It was not until 9pm on May 27 that Council members received a paper full of only criticisms of the management team.  No proposal nor any content of interim VP appointments, or candidates for any such appointments were mentioned therein.  Concerned about the possible deprivation of my role and authority in appointing interim VPs, I sought relevant legal advice in the morning of May 28. It was not until the start of the Council meeting that evening that I learned about the candidates proposed by Council Chairman for interim VP positions for the first time, as well as the redesignation of positions of two members on my team.   The legal advice I put forward was also disregarded at the meeting.

Second, on May 28, the Council did not follow the established procedures within that University and bypassed me to directly appoint interim VPs, contravening the University of Hong Kong Ordinance and Statutes.  While the Government is looking into the matter, in only a few days there was another leak of strictly confidential information from the University.  Yet the Council Chairman repeatedly condoned the leakage issue and, without taking into account my availability, went on to decide holding a Council meeting on June 19.   These raise doubts about whether the Council can handle university affairs in a fair and just manner.

Third, I am extremely disappointed that Council's highly confidential documents have been leaked again. This leak, similar to the malicious complaints in September 2023, aims not only to defame me but also to place the University in chaos or even a standstill.  These have already caused serious impacts on the University.

Fourth, after the Council’s panel had completed its investigation on the "whistleblower’s" anonymous complaints in February, I received 20 letters from the Council Secretary in the following 60 working days, i.e. one letter in every three days.  All these letters required me to respond within a short period of time, with the shortest deadline set within only 1.5 days. The letters raised numerous questions, and after I responded each time, more questions and queries followed, consuming a significant amount of time and energy from the management team to deal with this relentless oppression akin to "witch-hunting".

Fifth, the letters sent to me by Council Secretary did not specify who authorized the Secretary to send the letters. According to the University’s established practice, the Council Secretary should have received authorization to act on behalf of Council.  However, as a member of Council, I am not aware of any such authorization given to the Secretary. I have also enquired about it but received no response.

Sixth, the accusations in the letters involve my work since I became the President, including all my earlier work during the term of the former Council Chairman.  However, the previous Council (including the incumbent Chairman) did not find any problem at that time. On the contrary, they recognized my work and renewed my contract.

Seventh, the University management and I have spared no efforts to fill the vacant VP positions.  Since November last year, we have submitted several VP candidates to the Council Chairman according to the established procedure, but the recommendations have never been included by the Council Chairman in the Council meeting agenda.  The delay had also not been explained by the Council Chairman for a long period of time.  Last year, I also proposed creating new VP positions, including VP(Innovation), VP(Campus Facilities), and VP(Health), but not VP(Business). However, the Council Chairman has never discussed those suggestions with me nor Council members for the past seven months until the Chairman abruptly tabled a list of seven interim VPs at the Council meeting on May 28.

Eighth, regarding the Human Resources Policy Committee (HRPC) meeting on April 22, the so-called meeting minutes were only an unconfirmed draft.  Several attendees of that meeting have already raised their opposition in writing to the HRPC Chairman as to the failure of the draft in reflecting accurately the discussion at the meeting.   The proposed creation of two new interim VPs were only the personal opinions of the HRPC Chairman rather than a suggestion of the HRPC as alleged in the draft and unconfirmed meeting minutes.

Ninth, I am in fact also a member of the HRPC.  When the meeting was being arranged, I expressed my strong desire to attend the meeting to the HRPC Chairman. However, as the HRPC Chairman was calling for a meeting in a haste, my schedule was unable to accommodate the proposed dates. I earnestly requested the HRPC Chairman to pick other dates. At that time, the HRPC Chairman’s response was that the meeting would only be for open discussions and no decisions would be made therefrom.  However, the Council now relies on the so-called recommendations and an unconfirmed draft to justify the relevant appointments.  This deviates from proper procedures and is a distortion of facts and concepts.

Tenth, over the past few years, I have regularly reported the University's major developments and my work to the Council.  Through other VPs and University Officers, the detailed work of the University was also reported to the subcommittees under the Council. The various accusations in the Council Secretary’s letters are baseless and intentionally misleading.

I believe there will be more attempts to discredit me and the University in the future, including even more serious defamation. This statement only provides a succinct and clear response to the issues mentioned in the Council’s message and news reports, with a view to clarifying the truth. It is my least intention to present University affairs in detail to the public.  I believe that the best response to malicious slanderers is to maintain one's integrity and let the truth speak for itself.

I want to point out that the flagrant leakage of confidential correspondences within the Council resembles the malicious anonymous letters made against me last year. The bulk of the information in the anonymous letters came from different departments within the University, which could only be accessed by certain members of the Council and the management. I believe that both instances of leaks are organized and premeditated attempts to defame me and the management.

At this critical moment of Hong Kong's development, certain individuals, disregarding Hong Kong's strategic opportunities for development and talent acquisition, continue to maliciously stir up incidents and disrupt the University and Hong Kong. I am deeply saddened by this. As the President of the University, I must uphold the principles of good governance and University reputation, and lead the University to advance its development. I sincerely hope that we can be free of interferences, resume our aspirations, focus on development, attract talents, and make every effort to build Hong Kong into an education hub in Asia and the world.

Professor Xiang Zhang, President and Vice Chancellor of HKU

June 10, 2024

Appendix - The following are relevant issues involved in the leaked correspondences as reported in the news:

1. Executive Vice President (Administration and Finance) (EVP)

In accordance with the procedures of the University, as regards the appointments of Vice Presidents (VPs), there has not been any requirement that prior approval has to be sought from the Human Resources Policy Committee (HRPC) before a candidate is recommended to the Council.  The candidate for a VP position is recommended by the President and the approving authority rests with the Council.  Separately, the approving authority for remuneration packages rests with the HRPC.  The two approval mechanisms are separate and not sequential.

2. Shenzhen Campus

Developing the Shenzhen Campus involves a complex process of dynamic interactions, communications and negotiations between the University and all levels of the Shenzhen Municipal Government.  To protect the interest of the University, details along the process have to be kept confidential.  When consensus is anticipated to be reached, the University management will in the first instance ask for a special Council meeting to be convened and report the latest development to the Council.  In the past the Council Chairman has convened and chaired special Council meeting of such nature upon the request of the University management.

Since February 16, 2023, the Council Secretary began to ask for progress reports as regards the development of the Shenzhen Campus.  In response, the University management has for various times proposed giving a PowerPoint presentation to the full Council, or meeting some Council members who express concern over the negotiations in relation to the Shenzhen Campus.  These were all rejected by the Council.

In March 2024, the University management further communicated with the relevant Mainland counterparts and submitted to the Council on March 19 a report within the confines of confidentiality.  Subsequently, the Council Secretary again raised more questions on April 2, some of which were not directly related to the project.  The management was requested to provide a detailed report by April 8.

On April 16, 2024, at the Council meeting the University management gave a detailed presentation on the overall considerations and progress of the University’s development in the Mainland and of Shenzhen Campus.  After just ten working days, i.e. on May 2, 2024, the Council Secretary wrote and requested again a detailed progress report regarding the Shenzhen Campus.

3. Business Trips

The President’s duties are to represent the University to participate in international conferences and academic exchange events, conduct negotiations on collaborations, connect with alumni and donors, as well as recruit top talents.  These necessarily involve business trips to the Mainland and overseas.

From December 2020 to March 2024, I have been on business trips for 199 days, among which 88 days were for meeting quarantine requirements, weekends or holidays.  On average, three days per month were for business trips.

During these few years, I have complied with the University requirements to report my business trips in advance to the Council Secretary who is also the Registrar, who then reports to the Council Chairman as per established practice. (Since late 2020, considering the evolving situation in Hong Kong and the international scene, as well as the stringent pandemic controls, I have not listed the specific cities involved in the business trips.  This practice followed the same as when the former Council Chairman was in position.  I cannot believe how as the news reports alleged that the Council Secretary had accused me for not having reported my business trips.

Given that the business trips involved recruitment and negotiation matters inclusive of sensitive information and personnel matters, I reported only major items relating to my business trips in my reports to the Council meetings.

4. Structure of the President’s Office

In February 2024, upon the request of the Council Secretary, the President’s Office (PO) submitted the organisation chart of the PO.  The Council Secretary then wrote to request more information.

In April 2024, the organisation chart of the PO was also submitted to the HRPC Chairman via the Human Resources Office.  In the past few years, the PO have been coordinating numerous projects. To meet the surge in workload, some of our professors and retired professionals in respective fields were invited to become Associate Vice Presidents and advisors; most of them worked for the PO on a part-time or non-salaried basis.  There were precedent cases during the term of the former President.  As a matter of fact, the PO also included Provost, EVP, several VPs and their respective administration teams.  Applying the same token, the numbers of staff in the POs of Stanford University, University of California Berkeley and Tsinghua University reached 80 – 100.

5. Attendance at / by delegated representatives at meetings

The President is in principle a member of almost all committees.  The number of committees within the University amounted to a few hundreds, it is impossible for the President to attend or chair every Committee meeting.  The practice of the President delegating his/her vices to attend meetings is usual across top universities around the world.

Soon after I became the President, Hong Kong underwent swift changes and there arose an imminent need to recruit outstanding academics globally.  I have hence delegated the chairmanship or membership of some committees (including the Finance Committee and the Campus Development Policy Committee) to other members of the management team.  My team reports the major issues to me and to the relevant committees under the Council.

The President is the chairman of the Academic Board under the Senate and attends most of the meetings.  In the initial stage of my term, I have delegated the chairmanship of the Senate to Provost.  It is an arrangement for division of labour and authority among the President and Provost.