Academic freedom is specifically guaranteed under Article 136 of the Basic Law. But, as with so many other freedoms, this is not something that can be protected purely by written promises. Some of the potential threats come from beyond the SAR: such as China's denial of exit visas to mainland professors, and US restrictions on the export of powerful computers needed for research purposes.

Hong Kong can do little about these. But local academics, tertiary institutions, as well as everyone in the community, have a responsibility not to add to them by doing anything which might be seen to jeopardise such a valuable asset to our educational system and way of life. Unfortunately it seems that the importance of this is not yet adequately appreciated: with some people apparently failing to appreciate the implications their actions may have upon perceptions of academic freedom.

Whatever provisional legislator David Chu Yu-lin's intentions, his contacting of the superior of an academic who attacked him has been portrayed as an attempt to silence an unwelcome critic. Mr Chu should have realised his actions could be interpreted in this way. Although he did not use Legco notepaper, as a prominent public personality he must expect his actions to come under intense scrutiny. Similarly, City University should have been more sensitive to how its new regulations restricting outside activities by staff would be perceived. The university says these were never intended to interfere with academic freedom. But the rules are so broadly-worded that, if interpreted literally, they would even prohibit staff from giving press interviews without prior approval.