The Antiquities Advisory Board (AAB) is a statutory body of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region with the responsibility of advising the Antiquities Authority on any matters relating to antiquities and monuments. The AAB was established in 1976 along with the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO) when the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) was enacted, and comprises members appointed by the Chief Executive. The corresponding governmental ministry is the Development Bureau, and executive support for the AAB is provided by the AMO which is under the Development Bureau.
Formation The Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) was passed in 1971. However, the ordinance was not "give[n] life" and the AAB was not constituted until February 1977.Chugani, M. (8 June 1978). No Place for History in Money Conscious HK. Hong Kong Standard. Retrieved 20 April 2022, from https://hknews.lib.hku.hk/newspaper/view/22_01.01/34666.pdf.
According to section 17 of the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53), the AAB consists of members the Chief Executive may appoint, with one being appointed chairman by the chief executive. The ordinance does not mandate a minimum number of members, nor the qualifications to become a member.Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53), section 17.
Many of the members of the board are neither archaeologists nor historians, but are instead architects, academics, and former officials. The board consists of 20 members with effect from 1 January 2023 to 31 December 2024, as follows:Gazette of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (2023). G.N. 870. Retrieved from https://www.gld.gov.hk/egazette/pdf/20232706/egn20232706870.pdf. Member ProfessionSO Cheung-tak, Douglas (chairman)Solicitor of Hong KongIP Chung-man, TonyArchitectFU Chin-shing, IvanArchitectHO Kui-yipSurveyorOur Hong Kong Foundation. (n.d.). Sr. Vincent Kui-Yip HO, JP. Retrieved from https://www.ourhkfoundation.org.hk/en/node/1542.YEUNG Wing-shan, TheresaUrban plannerYUEN Siu-bun, EdwardCertified public accountantYIP Ka-ming, AliceCertified public accountantSHUM Ho-kitSolicitor and Chairman of the Yuen Long District CouncilYuen Long District Council. (n.d.). Yuen Long DC Members. Retrieved from https://www.districtcouncils.gov.hk/yl/english/members/info/dc_member_list_detail.php?member_id=2434.CHEUNG Tih-lin, VanessaManaging Director of Nan Fung Development LtdSEE Sau-mei, SalomeExecutive Director of Hong Kong Economic Times HoldingsTSANG Chiu-tong, BrianEntrepreneurCHAN Chun-hung, VincentSenior Managing Director of Investment GroupDr YEUNG Wai-shing, FrankieSenior District Director at AIA International LtdThe Better Hong Kong Foundation. (n.d.). Dr. Frankie W. C. YEUNG. Retrieved from https://www.betterhongkong.org/council/33-enn.Dr LEE Ching-yee, JaneSocial entrepreneurSU Yau-on, AlbertChief Executive for Tung Wah Group of HospitalsProfessor LI Chi-miu, PhyllisAdjunct professor of geography at the University of Hong KongProfessor CHEUNG Sui-waiProfessor of history at the Chinese University of Hong KongDepartment of History, CUHK. (n.d.). CHEUNG Sui Wai. Retrieved from https://www.history.cuhk.edu.hk/profile/cheung-sui-wai/.Dr LAM Weng-cheongAssistant professor of anthropological archaeology at the Chinese University of Hong KongDepartment of History, CUHK. (n.d.). LAM Weng Cheong. Retrieved from https://www.history.cuhk.edu.hk/profile/lam-weng-cheong.Professor CHU Hoi-shanProfessor of architecture at the Chu Hai Institute of Higher EducationProfessor CHAN Ching, SelinaProfessor of sociology at the Hong Kong Shue Yan University
Role The AAB advises the Antiquities Authority, double-hatted by the Secretary for Development since 2007, on: historical items to be declared as monument or a proposed monument under of the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53), how to restore and conserve the historical items, and promote the conservation of Hong Kong's heritage. In this role, it is responsible for "grading" historical buildings in Hong Kong according to a grading mechanism.
From the outset, the AAB was faced with difficulty in its work: problems arise when the AAB wishes to declare a proposed monument or monument in government properties which the government wish to develop, and private properties which the owners who felt that such declaration would "reduce their rights of ownership". The lack of transparency and enforcement power of the grading system also sparked controversy.Kwan, J., Tsim, T., & Lin, E. (11 June 2016). Are politicians and the Hong Kong government becoming less transparent?Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 19 April 2022, from https://hongkongfp.com/2016/06/11/are-politicians-and-the-hong-kong-government-becoming-less-transparent/; Lai, C. (10 May 2007). Historic status for pier, but future still in doubt. South China Morning Post, p. 1.
Relationship with other government agencies
Relationship with the Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO) and the Leisure & Cultural Services Department (LCSD) The AMO offers secretarial and executive assistance to the AAB in preserving historic places with great archeological or historical importance. The AMO executes the advice made by the AAB, including executing the Chief Executive's decision to declare monuments, and thus is an important executive arm of the Antiquities Authority (i.e. Secretary for Development).
Both the AMO and the LCSD undergo identification, records, and research on crucial historical buildings, as well as organize and coordinate surveys and excavations in related areas. They provide professional advice regarding the protection of historical relics to the AAB by sitting on the AAB's regular meetings every 3 months.
Relationship with the Development Bureau and the Antiquities Authority The Development Bureau is responsible for heritage conservation, while the Secretary for Development acts as the Antiquities Authority under s.2 of Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53).
Under s.18 of the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53), the AAB gives a recommendation for the Antiquities Authority on matters relating to antiquities, proposed monuments or monuments under s.2A(1), s.3(1), and s.6(4) of the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53). Those matters include the declaration of proposed monuments, declaration of monuments, and exemptions of forbidden acts relating to certain monuments.
Relationship with the Chief Executive (CE) S.17 of the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) states that all members of the AAB, including the chairman, shall be appointed by the Chief Executive. Also, most AAB's advice made to the Antiquities Authority needs to seek the approval of the Chief Executive before execution. These decisions involve the extension of the duration of declared proposed monuments, declaration of monuments, and exemptions of prohibited actions concerning specific monuments according to s.2B(2), s.3(1), and s.6(4) of the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) respectively.
Controversies
Formation of the board Members of the AAB have mainly been drawn from architects, academics and former officials. Amidst the demolition of the Edinburgh Place Ferry Pier in 2006, the AAB was criticized by conservationists on allegations that members did not thoroughly discuss proposals for preserving the Pier. In a subsequent review of conservation policy, the Home Affairs Bureau reviewed the composition of the AAB and increased the number of board members from 21 to 28. The Government also pledged to diversify the background of appointees and create a balanced mix of board members from various sectors and professions.Home Affairs Bureau. (2007). Built Heritage Conservation Policy. Legislative Council of the HKSAR. Retrieved 9 April 2022, from https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr06-07/english/panels/ha/papers/ha0309cb2-1215-1-e.pdf.
Criticisms of board membership resurfaced in the 2010s under accusations that the AAB was politicised amidst pro-government decisions. In June 2012, then-Chairman Bernard Chan gave a casting vote amidst a tie on the provisional grading of the West Wing of the Former Central Government Offices, leading to its classification as a grade II historical building. Chan was criticized for his tie-breaker vote that favoured the Government's position in demolishing the West Wing; Chan eventually resigned, citing a need to preserve the credibility of the board. Then-Secretary for Development Carrie Lam responded by arguing that conservation groups rallied irrational criticisms against board members. Criticisms continued after appointment of board members by then-Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying in 2013; the Conservancy Association voiced concerns over potential conflicts of interest as some appointees were considered supporters of Leung.
Critics also observed an inadequate degree of expertise in antiquities conservation among board members. Professor Ho Pui Yin, a former board member and socio-economic historian at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, made criticisms that some board members had little connection to the conservation of historical buildings and monuments; she observed that some appointed members had political stances and were conservative by considering antiquities in terms of economic values. Former member Ko Tim-keung also observed that the board had been oblivious to locations of military heritage. He criticized members that he perceived were inclined to grade historical buildings based on architectural appearance without paying due attention to the historical use of antiquities. In response to controversies over mistreatment of the Former Sham Shui Po Service Reservoir in 2021, board chairman Douglas So also indicated the possibility of reviewing the appointment mechanism of board members.
Problems of the Grading Mechanism Currently, grades for historic buildings are defined as stated in the following:List of the Historic Buildings in Building Assessment (as of 18 March 2009). Web.archive.org. (2009). Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20121013063735/http://www.lcsd.gov.hk/ce/Museum/Monument/form/AAB-SM-E.pdf.
Grade I: "Buildings of outstanding merit, which every effort should be made to preserve if possible." Grade II: "Buildings of special merit; efforts should be made to selectively preserve." Grade III: "Buildings of some merit; preservation in some form would be desirable and alternative means could be considered if preservation is not practicable."
The AAB's grading system is criticized for its lack of power and transparency.
Grading Mechanism Lacking Power The AAB and the AMO were accused that they only have the structural composition but not actual power. When it comes to the demolition of historic buildings, this important decision wholly depends on the government's discretion. The reasons are the AMO only distinguishes, records, and investigates different historic sites, while the AAB provides professional opinion to the Antiquities Authority as to whether a historic building should be declared as a monument. The Antiquities Authority reflects the advice for the Chief Executive and waits for his approval for declaration. The final and major decision power about the declaration of monuments rests on the Chief Executive and the Government. Grading of historical buildings is not binding the government regarding the monument's declaration and its demolition and serves only as a reference for the government to consider.
In the case of the Queen's Pier, although it was listed as a Grade I historic building, the government decided not to declare it as a monument due to various reasons, including the economic and urban development, as well as the lack of public support. The government also stated that the grading of Queen's Pier could not stop it from being demolished. At last, Queen's Pier was closed on 26 April 2007 to enable land reclamation and demolished in February 2008.