【法政匯思就社會進一步動盪的聲明】
【Statement on Further Escalation of Social Unrest】
// 當體制構建不能保障市民應有的追索權,暴力兼「私了」必如落山流水跟著來,這已清晰可見。僅說無諾,何能「止暴制亂」?
// Where the system fails to provide proper recourse, vigilantism and violence proclaiming self-defence arise as simple cause and effect. Without any real commitment by the Government to de-escalate and defuse the political crisis, verbal condemnation and physical crackdown will do nothing to ‘stop violence and curb disorder’.
https://www.facebook.com/…/a.455221741311…/1474268236073377/
【法政匯思就社會進一步動盪的聲明】
【Statement on Further Escalation of Social Unrest】(Scroll for English)
1. 近日,警隊的行為就如國際特赦組織所言越見低劣。[1] 這皆因政府漠視其專家提供的建議,並以歇斯底里、毫無章法可言的策略回應持續的動盪。
2. 五個月來,政府持續容許以下情況發生,對警政問題及根本的政治危機藥石亂投:
a. 阻礙救護人員前往現場拯救傷者;[2]
b. 偏頗地處理強姦或酷刑對待被拘留人士的指控;[3]
c. 肆無忌憚地濫用武力;[4]
d. 以諸多藉口為警察的失控或報復行為辯解。[5]
3. 法政匯思強烈譴責警隊濫用武力,及其本末倒置、往往為社區添煩添亂的驅散示威者行動。警方在十一月十一日於香港中文大學(「中大」)、香港理工大學及香港大學等驅散非法集結及/或堵路行為的行動,指稱的事實根據惹人非議。[6] 在撰寫此聲明之時,警方甚至以催淚彈及橡膠子彈回應中大校長的善意,與學生發生激烈衝突,造成最少60人受傷及多人被捕。[7]
4. 歸根究底,現有的制度未能公正地調查涉及警務人員的刑事指控,乃是警民衝突的源頭。樂觀地看,這可能只是個別調查人員的疏忽;悲觀地看,這反映一種互相包庇的文化,可能已由員佐級警員到警務處處長、保安局局長甚至特首,滲透警隊及政府上下。無論是哪一個情況,這種警察橫行無忌的觀感已經令公眾對負責調查大部分罪行的警察的信任蕩然無存。這個缺口一開,刑事司法制度剩下非常有限的能力,處理失職警員。
5. 法政匯思繼續呼籲香港政府成立獨立調查委員會,調查包括六月份以來政府的治安管理手段。除了將肇事者繩之於法外,更重要的是全面檢閱香港警隊以達至結構上的改革。至今,特區政府對於這個明顯又實際的選擇不屑一顧,堅持讓一個缺乏監察權力的獨立監察警方處理投訴委員會(「監警會」)[8] 去調查警察投訴及內部調查科。這正正就是問題根源所在。
6. 監警會委派的國際專家組就這個問題發表《進展報告》。國際專家組與政府持相反意見。他們批評監警會在結構上欠缺全面調查權力,對監警會這一個輕型、監管式的體制是否能夠做出決定性的貢獻表示懷疑,更指出下一步的可能性諸如「委派一個享有所需權力的獨立調查機構以作更深程度及更廣泛的調查」,意味著一個獨立調查委員會。[9]
7. 對於近數星期暴力頻頻,政府沒有採取任何行動,只是堅拒示威者的訴求(包括成立獨立調查委員會),更稱他們為「人民的敵人」。[10] 警員們多月來非人化地濫稱示威者為「曱甴」。[11]
8. 法政匯思絕對不認同法外制裁。此立場於七月二十五日之聲明已表明。然而,當體制構建不能保障市民應有的追索權,暴力兼「私了」必如落山流水跟著來,這已清晰可見。僅說無諾,何能「止暴制亂」?
法政匯思
2019年11月15日
(PDF: https://tinyurl.com/tt2nzmr)
1. Police conduct has seen, in the words of Amnesty International, ‘another shocking low’ [1] in recent days as the Government ignored constructive feedback by its own experts and hysterically responded to the ongoing unrest without any rational strategy.
2. In particular, these allegations point to a wanton failure on the part of the Government to properly approach policing and the underlying political crisis, now in its 5th month:
a. Obstructing rescuers and ambulances from accessing the injured; [2]
b. Unfair handling of allegations of rape and torture in custody; [3]
c. Unapologetic excesses in its use of force; [4] and
d. Evasive defence of police officers acting impulsively or in retaliation. [5]
3. The Progressive Lawyers Group (the ‘PLG’) vehemently condemns the Police regarding their excessive use of force and dispersal operations which often create the chaos sought to be quelled. On 11 November, the police conducted operations in, amongst others, the Chinese University of Hong Kong (‘CUHK’), the Polytechnic University of Hong Kong and the University of Hong Kong to disperse unlawful assemblies and/or obstruction of traffic, [6] the factual basis of which has been doubted by many. As at the drafting of this Statement, as riot police responded to an olive branch by the CUHK Vice-Chancellor with tear gas and rubber bullets, severe clashes between students and riot police at CUHK are ongoing with at least 60 injured and dozens arrested. [7]
4. Nonetheless, the crux of the problem remains in the institutional failure to investigate criminal allegations involving police officers impartially. At best, it could be an omission by individual police officers in their execution of duty. At worst, it could be a culture that acquiesces and conceals wrongdoings affecting grassroot constables, the Commissioner of Police, the Secretary for Security and the Chief Executive alike. Whichever the case may be, this perception of impunity breaches the trust and confidence the public reposes in the police who are tasked with investigating most offences. With this link broken, there remains very limited recourse in the criminal justice system against rogue officers.
5. The PLG continues to call on the Hong Kong Government to appoint a Commission of Inquiry regarding, amongst others, the current approach to policing social unrest since June. Bringing wrongdoers to justice aside, the more important task is a holistic review on the Police Force and a roadmap to structural reforms. So far, the Government brushed aside this obvious and pragmatic option, insisting upon an inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Council (‘IPCC’) [8] whose (lack of) oversight over the Complaints Against Police Office (‘CAPO’) is the very issue at the heart of the current saga.
6. Curiously, the International Expert Panel of the IPCC appointed for advice on that very inquiry seems to hold a contrary view. In their Position Statement Report of Progress, the experts pointed out ‘structural limitations in the scope and powers of the IPCC Inquiry’ and noted that ‘it remains to be seen whether a light touch, oversight body like the IPCC, can make sufficient progress to produce any decisive contribution…’ It also identified a possible next step such as ‘a deeper more comprehensive inquiry in a number of respects by an independent body with requisite powers’, alluding to a Commission of Inquiry. [9]
7. In response to the extraordinary brutalities these few weeks, the Government did nothing but maintain that it will not yield to the protesters’ demands (including an independent Commission of Inquiry) and call them ‘enemies of the people’. [10] It has not helped that the police have for months been blatantly using such a dehumanising term as ‘cockroaches’ to refer to protesters [11].
8. The PLG stands by our Statement on 25 July 2019 and does not encourage citizens to take justice into their own hands. However, it is obvious by now that where the system fails to provide proper recourse, vigilantism and violence proclaiming self-defence arise as simple cause and effect. Without any real commitment by the Government to de-escalate and defuse the political crisis, verbal condemnation and physical crackdown will do nothing to ‘stop violence and curb disorder’.
The Progressive Lawyers Group
15 November 2019
(PDF version: https://tinyurl.com/tt2nzmr)
「包庇english」的推薦目錄:
- 關於包庇english 在 Charles Mok 莫乃光 Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於包庇english 在 吳濬彥 Wu Jun Yen Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於包庇english 在 八鄉朱凱廸 Chu Hoi Dick Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於包庇english 在 包庇的英文怎麼說? 就是shield!... - 道地學英文Learning English ... 的評價
- 關於包庇english 在 包庇?NCC通過"鏡電視"上架李勝峯酸:同顏色才可喊"新聞自由 ... 的評價
- 關於包庇english 在 《iET Facebook 英語學堂》 第41周: 包容vs 包庇 的評價
包庇english 在 吳濬彥 Wu Jun Yen Facebook 的最讚貼文
合作夥伴 – 香港警察濫權實錄資料庫 (LIHKG 原post ; Google Docs 中文、English)此頁面設有 英文 及 日文 版本,歡迎廣傳。
注意,由於大部分個案都有片為證,需要大量數據量瀏覽此頁面,故此本頁亦設有分頁模式,按頁瀏覽,現有 28 頁每頁 20 個個案(中文分頁模式 、 英文分頁模式 、日文分頁模式)
目前收錄的警察濫權個案超過 1400 個,涵蓋十三個範疇,包括休班時言行不當類、勾結與包庇黑勢力類、妨礙司法公正類、性暴力類、“ 恐嚇、威脅、言語暴力類 ”、拒絕出示委任證類、插裝嫁禍示威者、攻擊記者及妨礙新聞自由類、攻擊醫護及阻撓救傷類、濫用肢體暴力類、濫用警權類、與中共勢力合作類及違規使用武器類
本頁面將會持續更新所有警察濫權濫暴行為。
包庇english 在 八鄉朱凱廸 Chu Hoi Dick Facebook 的精選貼文
【 #選舉論壇 周永勤棄選 朱凱廸挑戰官商鄉黑勾結】
朱凱廸在有線論壇聽到周永勤棄選的宣布後,雖然感到震驚,但仍堅持繼續質問幾個和鄉事派關係千絲萬縷的候選人,因為6隊建制派之中其實已有4隊有清晰的鄉事背景:田北辰團隊排第二的王威信的父親是套丁大王王光榮、梁志祥得到元朗猛人曾樹和撐腰、何君堯則為中聯辦和鄉議局的新貴。
朱凱廸首先質問梁志祥,指他為包庇曾樹和以及新界鄉紳利益而令17000個公屋單位縮剩4000個,更令百多戶非原居民被逼遷。事實上,朱凱廸因為和村民一起抗爭,對抗新界鄉黑惡勢力,單是今年內已經收過兩次暴力恐嚇。
然後朱凱廸轉戰田北辰團隊,質問田北辰團隊排第二的王威信,到底他的家人有沒有套丁。王威信不敢否認,只說「我家人的事我不代答」。
朱凱廸繼續質問田北辰,是否同意何君堯提出的「套丁非刑事化」,然而田北辰再次迴避問題,只稱「法庭正在訴訟,要等法庭作出決定。」可見田北辰在面對龐大的新界鄉黑利益集團時完全不敢表態,只懂找擋箭牌並支吾以對。
周永勤的退選,說明西環級數的政治暴力再次出現。由小桃園飯局、天水圍落區曬馬,黑社會已明目張膽介入政治,到朱凱廸被恐嚇,再到周永勤被所謂「勸退」——新界西及香港已進入了這種政治暴力的狀態,一旦你接觸的議題碰到官商鄉黑的利益,就會被暴力威嚇。免於恐懼的自由,毫不容易。
然而,朱凱廸仍堅持要在這次選舉中,介入暴力黑暗的鄉政,揭露赤裸而粗暴的官商鄉黑政治,把新界政治和其黑暗的權力操作帶上香港的政治討論議程,堅持推動民主改革鄉議局,打破土豪劣紳的壟斷,對抗發展不公義和暴力政治。
朱凱廸明白,挑動黑社會與鄉紳的神經,反對他們在新界為所欲為,可能會令其人身安全受威脅。但朱凱廸更清楚的是:我們絕不能退縮,因為無權者一旦退縮,惡勢力只會更加肆無忌憚,香港人已經退無可退。
9月4日,請支持朱凱廸,把免於恐懼的信念散播出去。
民主改革鄉議局,終結官商鄉黑勾結,香港人要有土地自主!
English version and caption:
http://goo.gl/aGvUKi
#朱凱廸 #新西20號 #周永勤退選 #恐嚇政治 #政治暴力化 #梁志祥曾樹和中聯辦 #黑色的建制派 #官商鄉黑集團 #新界鄉黑政治 #何君堯最開心 #新契仔何君堯 #何君堯曾樹和好兄弟 #改革鄉委會 #鄉委會民主化 #挑戰暴力官商鄉黑勾結政治 #朱凱廸不向惡勢力低頭 #越惡越要挑戰 #票投朱凱廸 #VoteForEddie #NumberTwenty
______________
Telegram頻道:https://telegram.me/chu_hoi_dick
成為戰友:https://goo.gl/wlVQgV
Instagram:chuhoidick
選舉廣告自行製作 2016年8月26日
包庇english 在 包庇?NCC通過"鏡電視"上架李勝峯酸:同顏色才可喊"新聞自由 ... 的推薦與評價
... 包庇 ?NCC通過"鏡電視"上架李勝峯酸:同顏色才可喊"新聞自由"! @CtiNews ... English 100 Civics Test Questions and Easy Answers. U.S. Citizenship ... ... <看更多>
包庇english 在 《iET Facebook 英語學堂》 第41周: 包容vs 包庇 的推薦與評價
「包庇」是明知行爲不恰當但容忍或縱容,英文中可以用動詞“condone”: “The school will not condone bullying” 學校絕不縱容欺凌。 如果更甚, 為當事人 ... ... <看更多>
包庇english 在 包庇的英文怎麼說? 就是shield!... - 道地學英文Learning English ... 的推薦與評價
包庇 的英文怎麼說? 就是shield! 他呼籲人民不要投票給包庇罪犯的政黨。He appealed people to not vote for parties that shield criminals. ... <看更多>