Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing has called for shareholders to vote down a candidate seeking election to its board, a move that sets a bad example. As promised last week, this column would continue to report the latest twist of the battle of the HKEx director election on April 28 between Hong Kong-based fund manager Edward Chin Chi-kin and London-based metal firm head Apurv Bagri. Chin is known to the Hong Kong public as a supporter of the Occupy Central movement in 2014. Bagri is less known to the local community but is well known among the commodity trading circles in London. The pair are in a race for a board seat left vacant by veteran fund manager Oscar Wong Sai-hung’s retirement. We need to say “retirement” as Wong was sort forced to step down from the board after anew rule introduced in September which caps director representation at 12 years. Wong has served the board for 13 years. This rule is controversial because directors of other listed companies are not affected by the term limit, as long as shareholders vote to appoint them. In a circular issued Friday, the HKEx appeared to be endorsing one candidate over another. “The board considers that the proposal to elect Mr Bagri who possesses a wealth of experience in the non-ferrous metals futures trading business is in the best interests of HKEX and our shareholders as a whole, and recommends shareholders vote in favour of the appointment of Mr Bagri as a Director and vote against the appointment of Mr Chin as a Director at the AGM,” the circular said. Here is the issue. In any fair election, the exchange should give only such information to the shareholders as to inform of the choices. Most exchange shareholders are institutional investors who are sophisticated and do not need “guidance” from the HKEx. Of course, the HKEx board would support the member chosen by its nomination committee and it is also true that the board has no current members with experience in metals trading. But then, it could call for shareholders to support its favourite candidate and presents its own reason. The exchange now, however, has asked shareholders to vote against the candidate nominated by shareholders, which is hardly fair. The exchange’s approach is to discourage shareholders from exercising their right to select a candidate to speak on their behalf. Attempts to create greater board diversity are not served by discouraging shareholders in the nomination process. Shareholders of the exchange should use their votes to send a message to the exchange. enoch.yiu@scmp.com