Government officials should also be entitled to freedom of expression, and their contact with academics should not be interpreted as interference in academic freedom, the Court of First Instance was told yesterday.

The court was hearing an application submitted by the government to quash the decision of a chief executive-appointed commission of inquiry which found former senior official Fanny Law had meddled with the freedom of academics at the Hong Kong Institute of Education (HKIEd) by approaching the institute's academics.

Counsel representing the government Michael Beloff, QC, said in the hearing before Justice Michael Hartmann that the commission's finding is irrational and legally unsound.

The commission found that expression of opinion and objection by a senior government official to academics through direct contact will constitute improper interference with academic freedom even without threat of sanction or reprisal.

The government, fearing that dealings between officials and academics in the formulation of policies will be hindered, applies for the judicial review.

Beloff said the commission's finding has imposed a "wrong restriction of Law's and government officials' own rights", he argued.

He said academic freedom should be regarded as a subset of, and not superior to, freedom of expression, which is enjoyed by all members of the community including government officials.

He said there is no provision in the Basic Law and other constitutional documents that academics enjoy a wider right of protection, even if academic freedom is an independent right.

"There is no suggestion that government officials expressing disagreement with an academic by direct contact, assuming that there is no threat, will violate academic freedom," he said.

He said government officials will be unable to engage critics of government policies, which ordinary citizens can do, based on the commission's finding.

He also argued that Law, former permanent secretary for education and manpower, had no power to impose any sanction upon the academics as they were not employees of the government, hence constituting no threat whatsoever.

But Justice Hartmann asked Beloff whether such contact between senior government officials and academics will lead to chilling effect.

Beloff replied that the contact is far from chilling, and there is no evidence of a threat imposed by Law.

Justice Hartmann said in the hearing that debate between government officials and academics in the formulation of policies is acceptable, but added that intimidation and making threat should be avoided.

He said the court has difficulty thinking that the commission is trying to say all dealings between government officials and academics are improper.

Chief Executive Donald Tsang appointed the commission of inquiry, headed by Justice Wally Yeung, to investigate into allegations made by the HKIEd's former vice president Bernard Luk that government officials had demanded that he sack the institute's academics who were critical of government education policies.

Law, who was a senior education official since 1998 until she was transferred to head the anti-graft body in 2006, resigned from the government after the release of the report last June.

The hearing continues today.

(HK Edition 10/14/2008 page1)