Hong Kong housing body warns proxy vote limits may fail without anti-forgery focus
The Hong Kong Institute of Housing warns that capping proxy votes in building management will not stop abuse without tackling forgery. It urges digital authentication via iAM Smart and tougher fraud enforcement.
The Hong Kong Institute of Housing has warned that proposed limits on proxy voting in building management may be ineffective unless authorities focus on preventing forgery and adopting digital authentication.
Under government proposals to amend the Building Management Ordinance, an individual would be restricted to holding proxy votes representing no more than two per cent of total units in a development, or a maximum of 20 units. The public consultation period for the amendments closed last month.
Evelyn Wang Po-chun, president of the institute, said at a media gathering on Thursday that simply limiting the number of proxy votes would not stop determined actors, who could distribute excess votes among multiple accomplices. She argued the core issue is verifying the authenticity of proxies rather than restricting their number.
Wang also said enforcing limits would create practical difficulties during meetings. If an individual exceeded the limit during a vote, organisers would face the challenge of deciding which proxy votes to invalidate, particularly as different units often carry varying ownership shares.
The institute, which represents over 500 members, recommends using technology to resolve proxy disputes. It suggests authorities consider long-term solutions such as the government's iAM Smart mobile application and personal QR codes to verify owners' identities, and explore electronic voting. The institute believes law enforcement should lead efforts to crack down on fraud and forgery, protecting the legitimate rights of elderly residents, people with mobility issues and overseas owners who need to delegate their voting power.
Other proposed measures, such as requiring proxy forms to be submitted to building management committee secretaries at least 96 hours before a meeting and publicising the list 48 hours in advance, are already robust enough to manage potential issues, the institute said.
The institute also raised concerns about another proposed amendment introducing mandatory physical attendance and voting thresholds for major routine service contracts, including security, cleaning, fire safety and elevator maintenance. Anthony Yau Kam-fai, the institute's immediate past president, warned that property owners are generally unlikely to attend meetings in person if satisfied with their service providers, which could lead to failed bids for essential contracts and disrupt daily services. The institute urged the government to gather more data before implementing these thresholds and recommended establishing a mandatory maintenance fund funded by monthly management fees.