First there was his improbable proposition of an "Occupy Central" with "love and peace", the result of which, as we can see then and now, was a complete fiasco. Gone with his nonsensical ideals were his promises to turn himself in after the movement, as well as the disclosure of funds raised for his contentious campaign. And lo and behold, Benny Tai Yiu-ting is back with a vengeance, this time proposing "pan-democratic" members on the Election Committee only cast their vote of support for a Chief Executive candidate who would promise to disrupt the government lawsuit that could unseat Lau Siu-lai, Leung Kwok-hung, Law Kwun-chung, and Yiu Chung-yim - the four lawmakers alleged to have made invalid oaths in the legislature. From Benny Tai, it seems that we can never expect logical or sensible behavior.

To put it bluntly, Tai is asking the 326 "pan-democrats" in the 1,194-member Election Committee to support only a Chief Executive candidate who would renounce the lawsuit. Nothing short of blackmail, isn't it? But the real baffling issue is that when the said four lawmakers are among the 326 "pan-democrats" in the Election Committee, there is an obvious case of conflict of interest.

Let's not forget that Benny Tai is, in fact, an associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong. It certainly boggles the mind, then, that it would elude Tai that it is the Chief Executive's constitutional duty to uphold and execute the Basic Law, and one such method is through judicial reviews. By asking the 326 "pan-democrats" to not support a Chief Executive candidate who may pursue the lawsuit is not unlike asking a Chief Executive to neglect his constitutional duty. And this is an appeal coming from someone supposedly well-versed in the rule of law. Little surprise, then, that several pro-establishment legislators accused Benny Tai's scheme of being a breach of election laws and perverting the course of justice. It is an appeal that risks contempt of court on Tai's part, too, as the legislators suggested, for the judicial review is currently being processed.

Likewise, it is almost laughable that it doesn't seem to occur to Tai that while the appeal for support for certain public policies among the Election Committee may be acceptable, an appeal for the personal interests of certain individuals, and furthermore, individuals who are themselves among the Election Committee, simply defies common sense. Tai's appeal could easily be considered a violation of the Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Conduct) Ordinance because, as clearly stated in Section 11 of the ordinance, "any person who, without reasonable excuse, offers an advantage to another person as an inducement to or a reward for that person or for him to get or try to get a third person to vote or not to vote at the election for particular candidate(s) shall be guilty of an offence. Any person who, without a reasonable excuse, solicits or accepts an advantage for performing the above act shall also be guilty of an offence". If anyone is interfering with the rule of law, it is Tai himself.

The legality and morality of Tai's scheme aside, to assume all 326 "pan-democrats" will get in line and support it is, let's just say, incorrigibly optimistic. For one reason or another, the "pan-democrats" would want to show at least ostensible allegiance to the dropping of the lawsuit. But surely, some would retain clarity of mind enough to discern the risks entailed by such an allegiance as well. With Tai, it seems the best we can expect is more blunders and idiocy.