A university chief must be his own man

It was a colourful event: Lingnan University had to select a new president, and the university council held a consultative meeting at which councillors were to choose a candidate. They endorsed Leonard Cheng Kwok-hon in the face of student opposition. It was dramatic. Behind all that noise, however, we should calm down, look at the facts, and ask ourselves some soul-searching questions.

From the statements of both sides, we can reflect on some issues that concern us all.

To understand better, perhaps a note on American practice is in order. When an American takes up the presidency of a university, it's a well-known ritual that he would give a speech to the university community. He would present the vision for his leadership, and how he could take the school a step further. As president of the university, he is his own man, he takes orders from no one, not even the US president. If institutional independence and academic freedom mean anything, they mean at least this.

The president-designate of Lingnan, Cheng, said at the event that the central authorities were not his boss - but Bernard Chan, the council chairman, was.

Whether Chan has had experience in higher learning, or is familiar with university operations, and so on, is immaterial here. The point is whether the president - any president - of a university should have a boss, or claim to have one. Cheng is a business professor; he knows very well what people understand to be a "boss". To say that you are my boss is to say that, ultimately, you call the shots. At an institute of higher learning, if the president cannot be his own boss, the university's independence is compromised. Perhaps he said it half-jokingly. But such a comment could lead people to question his decency and intelligence. And was it an occasion for cracking jokes?