昨天，我刚翻完谷歌董事会执行主席Schmidt推销他当CEO时谷歌的运作，特别是2009-10年谷歌在中国业务的政策变换的书[1]。其中他提到Chinese dissidents的Gmail电邮被来自中国的黑客侵入，但没有提及我在2008、09年股东大会的发言和抗议，以及2010年的股东大会提案[2]。当时谷歌的三巨头中，年轻的两个创始人中，一人坚持“Don’t be evil”的原则不惜撤出中国、另一人犹豫未表态，而老练的Schmidt反对撤出中国。不管我的股东提案对最终的撤离中国决策产生了多大的压力作用，我很庆幸及时经历了这个人权原则与商业利润较量的过程。

我又收到一百年前安那祺主义者Alexander Berkman编辑发行的The Blast的复版[3]。我把他作为企业治理的榜样和先驱，希望所有商学院的学生都应该知道Berkman的贡献[4]。晚上，听了奥巴马总统的富有热情的国情咨文，想到政府也有不错的政策和充满理想的官员，但需要我们公民帮助，共同努力实施社会的进步，在微信上留言：“Berkman为了教育卡内基，替天行道、以身试法，被判刑22年，迫使美国的资本阶级开始‘行善’。我在与公司的董事会或官员会见时，常常想到如何比Berkman更有效改进企业治理。听到奥巴马的演讲，想到更应该帮助政府的政策改善”。但如何以最小的代价能够同时帮助世界头三号经济大国美中日和主导全球化进程的跨国企业改善政策呢？

早在去年4月30日，我致函IBM公司秘书长，提案成立公共政策委员会。原文不长，援引如下，付加适量汉译。

Shareholder Proposal on Establishing a Public Policy Committee

Resolved: shareholders recommend that International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) establish a Public Policy Committee to assist the Board of Directors in overseeing IBM's policies and practice that relate to public issues including human rights, corporate social responsibility, supplier chain management, charitable giving, political activities and expenditures, government regulations, and especially international relations that may affect IBM's operations, performance, reputation, and shareholders’ value.

Supporting Statement支持陈述

IBM currently has four board committees: Audit Committee, Directors and Corporate Governance Committee, Executive Compensation and Management Resources Committee, and Executive Committee, but without a committee to legitimately and ethically deal with public issues, especially international affairs, affecting our business没有一个委员会正当、符合道德地处理特别是国际事务等公共问题.  According to our 2013 annual report, IBM has 32% ($31,628m/$97,800m) revenue in Europe/Middle East/Africa, 23% ($22,923/$97,800m) revenue in Pacific Asia23%收入在亚太; “Within the BRIC countries of Brazil, Russia, India and China,  ... The company continues to see good opportunity in all regions over the long term and is continuing to invest in these key markets.” (p.40); “During 2013, performance in China was impacted by the process surrounding the implementation of a broad governmental economic reform plan公司在中国的业绩受到实施广泛政府经济计划的过程的影响.”(p.41).  IBM is truly a leading international business corporation in the world不愧是领导性国际商业公司.

The globalization has made the world increasingly connected and complicated全球化使世界更加联系和复杂起来.  For example, the U.S.-Japan Joint Statement on April 25, 2014 includes such dangerous contents as例如，2014年4月25日的美日联合声明包括以下的危险内容: "These commitments extend to all the territories under the administration of Japan, including the Senkaku Islands这些条约的义务延展到所有日本行政管辖下的地域，包括尖阁诸岛." "The United States welcomes and supports Japan’s consideration of the matter of exercising the right of collective self-defense美国欢迎和支持日本考虑实行集团自卫权."  The Japanese government has misled the U.S. under the U.S.-Japan Security Treaties to crash with the rising power of a nationalistic China since Japan utilized China’s 1989 Tiananmen Tragedy to abandon Japan’s peace constitution (the cornerstone of Asia’s peace after WWII) towards rearmament, militarization and fascism日本政府利用1989年中国的天安门悲剧放弃日本的和平宪法（战后亚洲的和平基础）、在美日安保条约下误导美国与崛起的民族主义的中国冲突.  Although the Japanese government signed the G-7 Summit declaration in 1989 to protect Chinese students, I, as a graduate student in Osaka University organizing Chinese democratic and human rights activities in Japan, was persecuted because I refused to collaborate with the Japanese government to betray my fellow Chinese students日本政府虽然在西方七国首脑会议上签署了保护中国留学生的宣言，但却迫害我这样的不肯与日本政府交易的在日中国留学生.  Please refer to Japan’s second largest newspaper Asahi’s interviews with me on February 10, 1990, October 20, 1992 and June 8, 2009, and my article “The Betrayal of Democracy: Tiananmen's Shadow over Japan,” Historia Actual Online, 2004, Issue 4 Volume 2.

Partly to respond to my proposals, Microsoft established such a public policy committee in 2012.  It is also necessary for IBM to establish a Public Policy Committee.

我几乎在今年的股东大会一年之前向公司提案，多少也期待公司会采取正确的步骤，与我直接联系，有足够的时间商讨改进公司的政策。但直到去年12月14日，我才接到律师行Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP的快件[5]，原来IBM高层把企业治理的业务也“外包”出去，雇佣这个律师行试图把我的提案排除掉！我12月19日向美国证券交易委员会SEC发出电邮，反驳律师行的三大离谱的理由。

• If “implementation of the Proposal would cause the Company to violate federal laws, rules and regulations”, why Microsoft’s establishment of such a public policy committee in 2012 did not cause Microsoft “to violate federal laws, rules and regulations”?  Even though there is possibility that a new public policy committee may have some overlapping functions with existing committees (which exist even among existing committees), the Company can choose not to violate federal laws, rules and regulations即使新的公共政策委员会可能与既有的委员会部分功能重叠，公司可以选择不违反联邦法规, as Microsoft does.

• My Supporting Statement does not contain any false and misleading statements我的支持陈述没有任何虚假和误导陈述.  Because the Company refuses to communicate with shareholders, it is natural for shareholders to regard the Company “without a committee to legitimately and ethically deal with public issues, especially international affairs, affecting our business” from media coverage and other independent sources. If the Company ever contacted me, there is possibility to improve shareholders’ view. Again, I urge the Company to positively and constructively communicate with shareholders我再次要求公司与股东展开积极、建设性的交流. At least, there should be an email account to receive shareholders’ concerns, suggestions and proposals.

• My Supporting Statement used my personal unique case to inform the Company and shareholders of the public policy situation regardingJapanandChina, where the Company has heavy business我的支持陈述引用我的独特经历向股东们提示公司在那里有大量业务的日本和中国的公共政策情况(as cited in my Supporting Statement). It is not “a personal grievance against the Japanese government,” 不是“个人对日本政府的控诉”and it never “wishes to further a personal interest.”也从未期望得到个人利益  The letter also doubted my statement of my life in Japan without checking the facts I listed in the Supporting Statement. I am always willing to provide any information, but the Company never contacted me. This is another indication how the Company mistreated shareholders.

今天，我收到SEC署名昨天2015年1月20日至律师行和我的电邮[6]，仔细阅读之后，不由得欣慰美国的民主法规仍然有效。这封由SEC企业财务部门总律师办公室的律师-顾问Jacqueline Kaufman回复的意见信全面反驳了Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP律师行排除我的提案的所有理由，三次重申”we do not believe that IBM may omit the proposal from its proxy materials” SEC不同意IBM可以把我的提案从股东大会资料中排除掉。

以下要看公司董事会如何发布反对声明、以及为了拉拢多数股东反对我的提案而不得不在实质上采纳一部分我的政策了。公司会不得不与我联系，但最后的战场移到80天以内召开的IBM 2015年股东大会。

[赵京，中日美比较政策研究所，2015年1月21日]