The proposed changes to the Civil Service Code (the updated Code for consultation) just unveiled by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government are expected to raise the professional standards of the civil service by rectifying some long-held misconceptions and providing a set of clear guidelines for civil servants to better perform their duties.

The updated Code has three notable highlights — clarifying the constitutional basis of the HKSAR; clarifying the concept of “political neutrality”; and balancing the maintenance of the government’s image and individual freedom of speech for civil servants.

Regarding the constitutional basis, the updated Code explicitly states that the HKSAR government must fully and accurately implement the “one country, two systems” principle, uphold the unity of the central government’s comprehensive jurisdiction and the high degree of autonomy of the HKSAR, implement the principle of “patriots governing Hong Kong”, and maintain Hong Kong’s unique status and advantages. 

The updated Code also clearly explains the constitutional role and responsibilities of civil servants under “one country, two systems”, including their responsibility to have an awareness of the obligation to safeguard national sovereignty, security and development interests, and to implement the principles of “patriots governing Hong Kong” and “one country, two systems” fully and accurately.

Safeguarding national security is the shared responsibility of all Hong Kong residents, and as part of the administrative authorities, civil servants have an even greater obligation to fulfill this responsibility, as explicitly stipulated in China’s Constitution and the National Security Law for Hong Kong.

 In a nutshell, the nation’s Constitution is the source of the HKSAR’s existence. Without constitutional authorization, there would be no HKSAR. Without the authorization of the central government, how can civil servants administer Hong Kong in accordance with the law?

Regarding political neutrality, this concept has been consistently misinterpreted by some individuals in Hong Kong, with some civil servants having refused to carry out government polices under the pretext of political neutrality. 

The universal norm is that political neutrality requires civil servants not to be biased toward or against any political party when performing their duties; it does not exempt them from carrying out government polices they dislike or which are not in line with their own political persuasions. 

In Hong Kong’s context, political neutrality for civil servants is premised on loyalty to the country and the HKSAR. All civil servants must be completely loyal to the incumbent chief executive and the HKSAR government and fulfill their duties to the best of their abilities. 

Regardless of their own political beliefs, civil servants must not be influenced by their political affiliations or beliefs when performing their duties, and they must not favor any political party with their administrative powers at any time. 

For example, civil servants at all levels worked diligently to promote the 2023 District Council Ordinary Election and urged residents to go out to cast their votes on Dec 10, but the HKSAR government and civil servants did not favor any political party or candidate. 

It was up to Hong Kong residents to decide which political party or candidate they wanted to vote for. This is true political neutrality.

Furthermore, civil servants cannot selectively refuse, delay or passively implement government policies that they personally disagree with based on their own political views, nor can they engage in any activities that would cause others to distrust or be hostile toward the government. Under no circumstances can civil servants, directly or indirectly, organize or participate in activities that obstruct the governance of the HKSAR government.

As the HKSAR government has stated, civil servants should be aware of and vigilant against the misinterpretation of political neutrality. Civil servants in any country must be loyal to their own country, which is a legitimate requirement accepted universally; this requirement for Hong Kong’s civil servants is in no way extraordinary. 

Criticism that the updated Code restricts civil servants’ freedom of speech is complete nonsense. 

Civil servants in any country should not express any opinions that oppose the current government. Western countries claim to respect rights, but it is unheard of for civil servants in Western countries to openly oppose their government’s policies. Regardless of how controversial the policies are, civil servants in Western countries never use freedom of speech as an excuse to openly oppose their government’s policies.

 Referring to loyalty to duty, the updated Code not only mentions the attitude that civil servants should have when promoting and implementing government policies, decisions and actions, but also provides clear guidance on how civil servants should express their opinions or engage in activities as individuals, and whether it may affect their own public office. 

Unlike other professions or jobs, public officials’ actions and behavior in performing their duties can have an impact on the government’s reputation, so do their activities outside of working hours because of their civil-servant identity. 

Civil servants should not only fulfill their duties sincerely, wholeheartedly and to the best of their ability, but also pay attention to personal conduct and morals outside of work, and should not let others mistake their personal opinions as the government’s stance. The updated Code will become a treasure trove for civil servants’ conduct.

When expressing opinions publicly, civil servants cannot criticize government policies or support other people’s opposing views using their official position, whether on the internet or social media. At the press conference unveiling the proposed changes to the Civil Service Code, Secretary for the Civil Service Ingrid Yeung Ho Poi-yan stated that civil servants are not completely prohibited from expressing their opinions, but they must follow the Civil Service Code when expressing opinions as individuals, including not giving the impression that their opinions represent official views or are related to their public office, or would bias their decisions when performing their duties. 

Higher-ranking civil servants should be more cautious as they are more likely to be recognized by the public and have closer ties to the government. Yeung also pointed out that civil servants should be careful to understand the background, purpose and nature of activities they participate in and should seek guidance from their supervisors if in doubt.

Civil servants worldwide are not allowed to harm the reputation of their respective governments. This is an international practice and a requirement of the civil service. The updated Code corrects some previously misunderstood concepts, allowing Hong Kong’s civil servants to have clearer guidelines to follow, which take into consideration both the government’s image and civil servants’ freedom of speech.

The author is a former information coordinator of the HKSAR government and a member of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.