with CUHK and to sack staff who were critical of government policies. On 15 February 2007 Chief Executive Donald Tsang appointed a Commission of Inquiry to "…establish the facts relevant to those allegations made by the Institute’s Academic Vice President…" and further said that "The Commission will ascertain if there has indeed been any improper interference with the Institute’s academic freedom or institutional autonomy." The Commission started hearings on 6 March 2007 and issued its report on 20 June 2007 . It concluded, with regard to the specific allegations, that "it was improper for someone of Mrs (Fanny) Law's position (then Permanent Secretary for Education and Manpower), to attempt to silence critics by addressing them personally or through their superiors." [Para 11.48] Also, "it was unacceptable that she did not express her opinions openly and through proper channels, but instead in a manner with the semblance, if not also the substance, of intimidation and reprisal. The Commission disapproves such behaviour unequivocally" [Para 14:25] and "even if well-intentioned (her complaints) were improper and constituted an improper interference with Mr Ip's and Prof. Cheng's academic freedom." It found that two other allegations, which arose during the course of the Inquiry but were denied by the senior government officials involved, did in fact occur. Firstly, Arthur Li had threatened to ‘rape’ the HKIEd if it failed to merge with CUHK; and secondly, Fanny Law had requested a professor at HKIEd to sack a staff member who was publicly critical of the Government’s reform agenda. The credibility of Arthur Li [Para 8.77] and Fanny Law [para 8.84] as witnesses was questioned by the Commission, whereas Professor Morris was described as a “generally honest” [Para 8.45] and “truthful” [Para 9.31] witness. On the day the report was published Fanny Law resigned from her post as Commissioner of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). Arthur Li was not reappointed to the new Government that came into office on 1 July 2007. However, in 2007, the Secretary for Education took out a judicial review to challenge one statement made in the Commission's report, viz. that a government minister should not directly approach academics. The court of first instance held that on this matter the Permanent Secretary's approach did not violate the Institute's right to academic freedom, and the judicial review was allowed on March 2009. This did not affect the findings of the Commission with regard to