• Sat
  • Jul 26, 2014
  • Updated: 11:31am
My Take
PUBLISHED : Saturday, 15 February, 2014, 4:05am
UPDATED : Saturday, 15 February, 2014, 4:50am

The truth is out there, somewhere, on C.Y. and Commercial Radio claims

Extraordinary allegations have recently been levelled against the government and Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying. If they are true, our top officials are now working ruthlessly to suppress their critics and undermine civilised values our society holds dear.

Or, some of their fiercest critics have taken leave of facts and common sense and now feel free to make the wildest charges against officials without evidence or even plausibility. Perhaps more painful is that the city's reporters now feel no need to investigate one way or another. Instead they just report whatever is said. Where are our Woodward and Bernstein when you really need them? But whichever is true, it's bad for the integrity and quality of our public discourse.

The latest allegation is levelled by sacked Commercial Radio host Li Wei-ling who said: "I'm unreservedly, 100 per cent sure that [my sacking] is the administration's suppression of the freedom of the press and of speech."

This follows claims by Apple Daily that the government pressured three of the city's biggest banks not to advertise with it. Why this potential scandal of the new century died after a week is anyone's guess.

Now, if Li's claim were true, it would be bad enough. But it was her disclosure of a private conversation to support her allegation that carried the bombshell. She said her former boss Stephen Chan Chi-wan - someone she doesn't trust and whom she believes is most directly responsible for sacking her - told her that government prosecutors were out to get him on bribery charges. As evidence, he said once he obtained an acquittal, they immediately filed an appeal in March.

But why? Li claimed Chan said the government was unhappy with the radio station with him as the chief because she was so critical of the government. Why take such a ridiculously circuitous and dangerous route to send a message that Chan might or might not get?

But if it were true, the far bigger story is not Li's sacking but Leung's or his officials' interference with the Justice Department's prosecutors, because this undermines their independence and the rule of law. Does this story have legs or will it die like the Apple Daily story by next week?

Share

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive
 
 

 

4

This article is now closed to comments

chuchu59
Organisations now never bother to explain controversial decisions. The Government took the lead in doing this ie they don't explain even when its in the public interests and others are fast following suit. Many people are now doing what they want and wont bother explaining why.This is not the way to behave and if LWL had done something wrong or harmed CR's interests by all means say it. She is discrediting CR, CY and CHAN but they are also discrediting her. By not divulging more information it keeps people guessing and inevitably some people will speculate one way or the other.
ann.wei.121
Interference with the Justice Department's prosecutors by the HK CEO ? True or not true ? Well, well , well, remember former Director of Public Prosecutions Granville Cross 's comments just a few months ago on the " Sally Aw Sian Case" in the era of CY Leung's mentor Tung Chi Wah, ? What was Elsie Leung's explanation for dropping the case ?
John Adams
"She said her former boss Stephen Chan Chi-wan - someone she doesn't trust and whom she believes is most directly responsible for sacking her - told her that government prosecutors were out to get him on bribery charges. As evidence, he said once he obtained an acquittal, they immediately filed an appeal in March.
But why? Li claimed Chan said the government was unhappy with the radio station with him as the chief because she was so critical of the government. Why take such a ridiculously circuitous and dangerous route to send a message that Chan might or might not get?
But if it were true, the far bigger story is not Li's sacking but Leung's or his officials' interference with the Justice Department's prosecutors, because this undermines their independence and the rule of law. "
Can all this be true ?
If so, where is the ICAC and the Justice Dept ?
321manu
This is he said/she said, with a dollop of conspiracy theory.
A radio station (or any business) has the right to choose who it wants to employ. That's indisputable. However, an employee cannot be fired on a whim, and proper dismissal involves disclosure of cause. So the station should tell us why Li was canned. Bad ratings? Inability to attract sponsors/ad buys? Breach of ethics? Personal issue that brought the business into disrepute? There could be any number of legit reasons why she was fired. And they should be afforded the chance to clear the air.
On the other hand, being told by CY to fire her because CY didn't like her criticism of him and his administration would not be one of those legit reasons. And CY or his cronies threatening legal action as the quid pro quo for firing her would be way across the line. After all, this is HK we're talking about, and not mainland China.
 
 
 
 
 

Login

SCMP.com Account

or