Political choice

A Legislative Council by by--election takes place onMay 16. It is only a week away. Willpolitically politically--appointed officials (the ChiefExecutive, the three principal secretaries, thesecretaries, the undersecretaries and the politicalassistants) go to the polls? When he was asked thisquestion last Thursday during question time in thelegislative chamber, Donald Tsang refused to give astraight answer, saying only he would talk about it aftergiving it some thought. Because some legislators labelthe by by--election a de facto referendum, it is verydifferent from conventional ones. Political appointeesmay have reason to decide politically not to cast theirvotes in the by by--election.

Normally, going to the polls is neutral and involvesno political connotations connotations. That is why it is regarded as. a civic obligation. However, one will make a politicalstatement simply by going to the polls on May 16. Themove would connote a degree of support for the defacto referendum. A political appointee's decision notto vote in the by by--election is a political one. It wouldsignify his disapproval of the de facto referendum. Apolitical appointee who decides not to go to the pollswill not fail to discharge his civic obligation, still less seta bad example to children.

While one may disapprove of an official's politicaldecision in respect of the de facto referendum, oneought to respect it, just as one must respect one'srelative's wish not to go to the polls though one mayhave bitterly argued with him because he believes thede facto referendum is "anti anti--mainland" and will throwHong Kong into confusion.

The Chief Executive and his thirty thirty--threesecretaries and undersecretaries are politicalappointees. Just as establishmentarians supportestablishmentarian legislators, so they may have theirpolitical position on the de facto referendum. That is nocause for complaint. However, it is necessary to seewhether the political appointees' position would bringabout such pressure on civil servants (politicallyneutral) that they may refrain from exercising their civicright.

The Chief Executive said last Thursday inanswering a related question, "It is up to civil servantsto decide whether to go to the polls. No civil servantswill come under any pressure from the ChiefExecutive, and no such pressure will be exerted." Thismay be taken as a solemn pledge he has made to civilservants that the administration will not settle scoreswith them. If any civil servant who goes to the polls onMay 16 comes under pressure afterwards, he shouldimmediately report it.

Furthermore, the government's advertisementsabout the by by--election have aroused controversy.Unlike past advertisements, those the government putup late last April contain no Chinese or English slogantto urge voters to go to the polls. Nor do its televisiono and radio commercials tell citizens not to forget to doso.

As the government has made it clear that it willdischarge its constitutional obligation to hold theby by--election, it ought to remain completely neutral andpublicise it exactly as it did the past by by--elections. Itshould do neither more nor less and leave it to votersto decide if they should go to the polls.

If the government has decided against givingpublicity to the by by--election for political reasons, itshould make public its position in an open andaboveboard manner and leave it to society to judgewhether it is sensible for it to do so. It has now deletedslogans to urge voters to go to the polls in itsadvertisements. Doing so is like lurking in a darkcorner to make petty moves to discourage voters. Thatis improper.

明報英語網「雙語社評」english.mingpao.com/critic.htm

政治官員可以不投票補選廣告不可以搞小動作

距離55 月16 日立法會55 區補選投票日只有一星期，究竟政治官員（特首、司局長、副局長、政治助理），會否在補選投票？曾蔭權上周四在立法會答問會被問及有關問題時，拒絕表態，只說考慮後會作交代。這次補選被部分議員冠以「公投」的名義，與傳統的補選有很大分別，作為政治任命官員，作出政治決定拒絕投票，是其政治選擇，有其理據。

一般情况下，投票只是一個中立表述，沒有政治信息，因此才被視為公民責任；但在今次補選，單單前往投票本身就不再是政治中立，而是一種政治表態，代表對「變相公投」某程度上的支持。因此，即使官員選擇不投票，也是其政治選擇的一種，代表官員對「變相公投」不認同，並非什麼「不履行公民責任」，更不是什麼「教壞細路」。

官員對「變相公投」的政治選擇，公眾可以不同意，但應該尊重，正如你有親朋戚友狠批「變相公投」是反中亂港，你可以不同意，與他激辯，但必須尊重他拒絕投票的意願。

香港的特首司局長等34 人，全屬政治任命，自然對「變相公投」有政治取態，情况就如建制派成員支持建制派議員一樣，沒有什麼好投訴的。不過，要注意的是，政治官員的取態會否對政治中立的公務員構成壓力，使之不敢行使公民權利。

特首上周四回應相關提問時稱， 「投票是自己的決定，不會受到行政長官任何壓力，亦無這些壓力」，可解讀為向公務員作出了莊嚴的承諾，保證不會秋後算帳，因此，若有公務員在投票後受到壓力，應立即舉報。

除了官員會否投票外，政府就補選推出的廣告也引起爭議。政府在44 月底推出新一輪補選宣傳廣告，與過往的補選廣告比較，少了「請踴躍投票」的中英文字句，在電視電台播放的廣告也沒有了「記得去投票呀」的呼籲。

政府既然表明要履行憲制責任，舉辦補選，就應徹底保持中立，直接跟隨過去補選的宣傳程序， 「不增加不減少」，讓選民自行決定是否投票。

如果政府因為政治理由，拒絕為補選搞宣傳，大可明刀明槍，向公眾清楚交代，讓社會裁決政府的做法是否合理。如今在補選廣告中刪去「請踴躍投票」的字眼，猶如躲在暗角，閃閃縮縮，在小處「搞抵制」，並不恰當。

Glossary

connotation //kk nn ''te teII ʃʃ(()n/)that which is implied in addition to the primarymeaning.

take

understand, consider.lurk /l :k/:wait secretary, especially because you aregoing to do something bad.