【宣誓覆核】盛傳日內將釋法張曉明現身重提「大是大非」 高院僅預留周四一日聆訊

引譚香文案裁定賄選指控不成立 港大校委會未考慮朱科涉明顯「拉票」行為|甘樂宜

2016-11-1 21:01
字體: A A A

港大校委會研究生代表參選人、來自大陸的朱科,早前遭另一參選人巫堃泰揭發在多個微訊群組發放「紅包」予選民答謝支持,有賄選之嫌。朱科最終以654票成功連任,港大校委會則以其發放的紅包金額微不足道等,裁定相關投訴不成立。港大學生會、港大教師及職員會及港大校友關注組,今日將早前收集的近5,000個聯署交予校方代表教務長韋永庚。

韋永庚今日向全體學生、教職員及校友發出電郵,就聯署一事作出回應,指校委會於上月25日的會議上審視包括法院過往判決在內的各種資訊,例如香港的相關條例沒有明文提到適用於大學內部的選舉,且大學本身目前並無條例規管選舉的相關行為,以及被投訴人朱科解釋指,他所提供的紅包只值約0.8元人民幣是微不足道等。

當中,校委會亦考慮到2012年的前立法會會計界議員譚香文涉賄選案。譚香文涉於2008年立法會選舉期間,為會計界選民舉辦免費講座。雖然她未有在活動期間作出明顯的拉票行為,但亦被指為有賄選之嫌。不過譚香文最終被裁定無罪,律政司其後對判決提出上訴亦被駁回。

然而,參看傳媒刊出朱科於微信群組發放紅包的對話截圖,可見他發放紅包後,曾「拜託」港大的學生投票,有明顯拉票的舉動,而其後亦有群組成員回覆指「已投」,與譚香文一案性質有分別。校委會應該考慮的案例,反而應是前區議員陳得偉涉賄選案。

陳得偉涉於2007年區議員選舉期間,以35元時薪聘請3名學護,為北角模範邨及健康村居民提供免費身體檢查。惟案發時工作枱上擺放了派發予居民選舉宣傳單張、年曆卡與原子筆。陳得偉亦戴上選舉彩帶,一度指示學護向居民拉票。裁判官指學護並非義務工作,加上拉票行為,裁定陳得偉兩項「提供利益予他人作為選舉中投票的誘因」罪名成立,即時入獄9星期。

除此之外,賄選指控是否成立,與當事人提供的利益價值無關,故校委會以0.8元人民幣微不足道作為其中一個裁定投訴不成立的原因,也是不成理由。

(撰文:甘樂宜)(圖片來源:蘋果日報)

港大學生刊物《學苑》公開電郵全文:

Election of One Postgraduate Student to the Council

Dear students, staff and alumni,

With reference to the petition to the Council by the Hong Kong University Students’ Union, Academic Staff Association and HKU Alumni Concern Group, the Chairman of the Council, as the spokesperson of the Council, wishes to make the following response.

(1) The Council considered at its meeting on October 25, 2016, the various materials, including the complaint received, the explanation proffered by the Respondent, the relevant legal principles and the precedent established by previous decisions of the Court for guidance (see 2 below).

(2) The Council took note of the following:

(a) None of the relevant Ordinances in Hong Kong specifically apply to an internal election within the University and further, the University itself does not currently have any specific rules regulating election related conduct.

(b) The judgment of the High Court in the case of the Secretary for Justice v Tam Heung Man [2012] HKEC 648 (“Judgment”), which was specifically brought to the attention of the Council, provides a good reference as to what constitutes corrupt conduct at an election. (Such Judgment sets out the legal principles when assessing whether any advantage was offered as an inducement to vote for a candidate. It was confirmed in the Judgment that in determining the intention of the relevant person the nature and value of any advantage could be taken into account.)

(c) The Respondent’s explanation, which included, amongst other things, that it was not his intention to bribe any person into voting for him and in this respect he referred to the insignificant value (about RMB 0.80) offered through the “Red Packet” by way of justification. (It was confirmed in the Judgment that in determining the intention of the relevant person, the nature and value of any advantage could be taken into account. Factors, such as whether the Respondent thought that anyone could be induced to vote for him by the offer of such a small amount of money, are linked to intention and could be considered.)

(d) An allegation of corrupt conduct at an election is a serious charge, and such allegations therefore would need to be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.

(3) On the basis of the materials before the Council and after careful deliberation, the Council resolved to dismiss the complaint.

(4) It was also recommended at the Council meeting that the University’s election regulations be reviewed and revised to provide further guidance to future candidates in light of this experience.

The Council Chairman is grateful to the student, staff and alumni groups for their concerns. It is hoped that the above has addressed the issues raised in the petition.

Yours sincerely,
H.W.K. Wai
Registrar

請支持我們持續發展,透過PayPal或其他方法贊助我們!
金額:
分類:|發表於2016年11月1日 下午9:01

發表評論

讀取中…
【閨蜜干政】 南韓檢方最快今晚正式檢控崔順實 青瓦台籲傳媒勿報傳聞