Mandy Tam

Hong Kong Politician

Mandy Tam was born in Ho Man Tin, Hong Kong, China on June 8th, 1957 and is the Hong Kong Politician. At the age of 66, Mandy Tam biography, profession, age, height, weight, eye color, hair color, build, measurements, education, career, dating/affair, family, news updates, and networth are available.

  Report
Date of Birth
June 8, 1957
Nationality
China
Place of Birth
Ho Man Tin, Hong Kong, China
Age
66 years old
Zodiac Sign
Gemini
Profession
Politician
Mandy Tam Height, Weight, Eye Color and Hair Color

At 66 years old, Mandy Tam physical status not available right now. We will update Mandy Tam's height, weight, eye color, hair color, build, and measurements.

Height
Not Available
Weight
Not Available
Hair Color
Not Available
Eye Color
Not Available
Build
Not Available
Measurements
Not Available
Mandy Tam Religion, Education, and Hobbies
Religion
Not Available
Hobbies
Not Available
Education
Middlesex University (BA)
Mandy Tam Spouse(s), Children, Affair, Parents, and Family
Spouse(s)
Not Available
Children
Not Available
Dating / Affair
Not Available
Parents
Not Available
Mandy Tam Career

In the 2003 District Council elections, Tam was elected as a member of the Wong Tai Sin District Council, representing Lung Sing. In the 2004 Legislative Council elections, she was elected as a Legislative Councillor, representing the Accountancy functional constituency. She lost re-election in 2008 to Paul Chan Mo-po. In 2006, Tam was a founding member of the Civic Party, but left the party in June 2009. Tam lost re-election in Lung Sing in 2007 to former district councilor Choi Luk-sing. In the 2011 District Council elections, Tam was elected again after a rematch with Choi in Lung Sing to the Wong Tai Sin District Council. She was re-elected in 2015 and 2019.

Tam has been embroiled in two separate controversies, one with the HKICPA, a professional body whose members are electors of the accountancy functional constituency of the LegCo; the second one was a result of what was perceived to be a politically motivated charge of voting corruption. In both cases, Tam's conduct was ultimately vindicated by the Court.

In October 2010, upon a complaint lodged by Chow Ka-leung a, politician from a rival political party, Tam was charged by the ICAC (Independent Commission Against Corruption) with engaging in corrupt conduct in the 2008 Legislative Council elections for "[offering] an advantage, namely service in the form of a free seminar to other persons as an inducement for them to vote for her at the election." Tam said the prosecution was politically motivated and maintained that the three free seminars she organized for professional accountants did not constitute a voting inducement. Lawmakers including Audrey Eu and Paul Chan expressed concern over the case.

Tam was fully acquitted of the charge after the trial before magistrate Gary K. Y. Lam on 27 May 2011, who "drew a distinction between inducement to vote for a candidate and inducement to attend an electioneering activity". This distinction was further upheld when the case was heard on appeal in April 2012, with the judge Hon Lam J upholding the acquittal, in view of the point of law that: "It is not enough for an advantage to be offered. It has to be offered as an inducement. And an inducement to do something else is not enough: it has to be an inducement [in this case] to vote for a particular candidate [for the vote bribery charge to be upheld]." The offering of a free CPD talk to an audience of professional accountants was not judged to be of value enough to serve as an inducement to change voting preference; nor was the free nature of the talk itself considered an intention to induce to alter people's voting preferences, although it was found to be an inducement to members to attend a talk they might otherwise not have attended. In the words of the judgment in the Court papers: "The conclusion that the Respondent [Tam] did exploit the CPD talk as an inducement to the electors to attend the tea-gathering (and to hear the speeches of Mrs. Chan and herself) does not necessarily mean that she intended the CPD talk to be an inducement to vote for her... Section 11(1) itself makes it clear that offering an advantage and inducement are two different elements in the offense. Thus, a finding of advantage does not necessarily lead to a finding of inducement." The Court upheld the acquittal and dismissed the appeal.

Tam ran in the "patriots-only" 2021 Legislative Council election in the newly created Kowloon Central geographic constituency.

Source