【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)
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
issue number中文 在 陳兩儀 Facebook 的最佳解答
【前港督彭定康錄影發言 促香港政府撤回修訂逃犯條例】
「我希望即使在這個最後階段,政府仍然可以退讓,撤回方案,不要再添亂。這修例不需要通過,亦不應該通過,香港應該繼續是一個有法治、有自由的社會,而不應該面對這些令人憂心的引渡修例。」
發言英文紀錄及中文翻譯:
Former Hong Kong Governor Lord Chris Patten video message Transcript
I know that this week in Hong Kong, thousands of people will be making their views clear, demonstrating against the proposals on extradition, which the government has put forward, extradition to China. It’s a proposal, or a set of proposals, which strike a terrible blow - I think - and so, I think to most people in Hong Kong and so does the international community, against the rule of law, against Hong Kong’s stability and security, against Hong Kong’s position as a great international trading hub. And the surprise is that the government in Hong Kong doesn’t seem to understand that. It does make you wonder sometimes who actually runs Hong Kong these days: is it the Hong Kong government or is it the joint liaison office acting on behalf of the communist regime in Beijing?
Why is this important? Well it’s the latest in a number of things that have happened in recent years which have tightened Beijing’s grip on Hong Kong, and which have profoundly worried people. I think for ten or a dozen years after 1997, things in Hong Kong went pretty well. Of course they could have gone better, I’m sorry that Beijing throttled the development of democracy, much against the promises that have been made earlier. But by and large, I think, Hong Kong remained a very free and successful society.
But ever since the regime in Beijing started to roll back Deng Xiaoping’s reforms and the developments that have taken place under Jiang Zemin and Zhu Rongji and Hu Jintao, and Wen Jiabao; ever since then, with the Party taking control over everything, cracking down on dissidents, cracking down on human rights, locking people up, incarcerating them in Xinjiang and so on. Ever since then, we know that Beijing has also been tightening its grip, or trying to, in Hong Kong. And I think that the latest proposals on extradition are an example of that.
Now a lot of very spurious arguments are put forward, it said that the present situation is a “loophole” which needs to be filled up - that’s absolute nonsense. People have known exactly why there shouldn’t be an extradition agreement with China for years, and many of the arguments put for the government’s proposals don’t actually pass the laugh-off-your-seat test. The argument that, well, it’s better to have an extradition treaty than to abduct people illegally from Hong Kong - are people really supposed to believe that?
Except for, but of course, Western democracies in Europe have extradition agreements with China, but they’re in a very different position to the position that Hong Kong is in. The reason why international chambers of commerce, why lawyers, why business around the world, why governments have raised their objections is very simple: because what these proposals do is to remove the firewall between Hong Kong’s rule of law and the idea of law - which prevails in Communist China - an idea of law where there aren’t any independent courts, where the courts and the security services and the party’s rules - which are, sometimes, pretty obscure - are rolled altogether. That’s why we’ve seen recently Canadian citizens that are locked up are taken as if it were hostage against things happening in Canada itself under the rule of law there. So it’s not surprising that people are so worried about what is happening.
I know that when people talk about the particular problem in relation to Taiwan, the leaders of the Hong Kong Bar Association over the last few years, I think a dozen of them, have put forward proposals which show how you could deal with that issue building on the existing common law.
So these proposals are bad for Hong Kong, they - I think - raise all sorts of questions which the government hasn’t even thought through, not least about Hong Kong’s economic importance and economic stability. We know very well that Hong Kong needs to be treated separately in economic and commercial matters from the rest of China. When I was governor a long time ago, I used to travel to Washington fairly regularly to argue the case for treating Hong Kong differently from, say, Shenzhen and Shanghai. But if you appear to be regarding Hong Kong from Beijing as though it was just another China city, then sooner or later, economic governments around the world, businesses around the world, when they’re looking even at things like the Belt and Road Initiative, they’re going to regard Hong Kong as just another part of China, and that would be really bad for the standard of living, for the quality of life in Hong Kong!
Above all, of course, if we go ahead, if the government goes ahead with this extradition agreement, it will cause unnecessary worries and anxieties in Hong Kong. That’s a really bad thing. I hope that even at this late stage, the government will back off and leave well alone. It doesn’t have to happen, it shouldn’t happen, and Hong Kong should carry on as a free society, under the rule of law, without having to worry about this extradition.
前港督彭定康錄影講話翻譯
我知道這星期在香港,成千上萬的人將會到街上遊行表達自己的意見,反對政府所提出將會容許引渡到中國的引渡修例建議。這是一項,或者應該說是一系列我及國際社會認為將會對香港的法治、香港的穩定和社會安全造成很大打擊的建議,它將會嚴重傷害香港作為一個國際貿易中心的地位。令人驚訝的是,香港政府似乎並不理解這一點。這確實令人懷疑這些日子究竟是誰在管治香港:是香港政府還是代表北京共產黨政權的中聯辦?
為甚麼這修例是這麼重要?這是近年來發生的一系列容許北京強行控制香港的事件之一,而這一直以來都讓人深感憂慮。我覺得在1997年之後的十年至十幾年,香港的情況進展尚算順利。當然,是本來可以更好,我很遺憾北京扼殺了香港民主的發展,違背了之前所作出的承諾。但總的來說,香港在那個時候仍然是一個非常自由和成功的社會。
但是,自北京政權開始推翻鄧小平的改革以及在江澤民、朱熔基、胡錦濤和溫家寶時期所推行的發展以後,共產黨控制着一切,打擊持不同政見的人,打擊人權,在新疆把人民關押等等。從那時起,我們就知道北京一直在試圖加緊控制香港。我認為最新的引渡建議就是一個例子。
現在香港政府提出了許多非常虛假的論點,它說目前的情況是展現了一個需要填補的「洞」,這絕對是胡說八道。大家多年來都確切地清楚知道不應該與中國達成引渡協議的原因。而政府提出的許多論點實際上也沒有一個不令你拍案大笑。政府認為制定引渡條約比從香港非法綁架人民更好,你認真覺得人們應該相信這個說法嗎?
當然他們又會說歐洲的西方民主國家與中國已經簽訂了引渡協議,但它們與香港根本處於完全不同的地位。國際商會、律師、商人及各國政府之所以提出反對意見的原因非常簡單:因為這些修例將會摧毀香港法治與中國共產黨的法治概念之間的防火牆。中國的法律觀念不包括任何獨立的法院,並把法院、國安部門以及黨的規則 (黨規則亦有時相當模糊)完全混在一起。這就是為甚麼我們最近看到被關起來的加拿大公民被用為人質,反對加拿大本身在她自己國家的法治下所發生的事情。因此,人們如此擔心這修例所帶來的影響並不奇怪。
我知道當人們都正在談到與台灣有關的問題之際,過去幾年的香港大律師公會領導人,應該是有十幾位,都已經提出意見,說明你如何就着香港現行的普通法來處理這個問題。
這些修例對香港不利,我認為這些修例所引發的疑問是甚至政府都沒有仔細考慮過的,尤其是對香港經濟重要性和經濟穩定性的影響。我們非常清楚在經濟和商業方面是需要把香港與中國其他地區分開對待。很久以前,當我還是港督的時候,我經常前往華盛頓游說對方看待香港的時候要跟對待深圳和上海之類的中國城市有所不同。但是如果以北京的角度看香港,將香港當為另一個普通中國城市,那麼世界各地的政府及企業將會視香港為中國的一部分(而不是特區),就算是看待「一帶一路」之類倡議時亦會是如此。這對香港的生活水平和生活質素都是非常不利的!
當然,最重要的是如果香港政府繼續硬推這些引渡修例,這將會在香港引起不必要的憂慮和焦慮。這些都是非常糟糕的事情。我希望即使在這個最後階段,政府仍然可以退讓,撤回方案,不要再添亂。這修例不需要通過,亦不應該通過,香港應該繼續是一個有法治、有自由的社會,而不應該面對這些令人憂心的引渡修例。
issue number中文 在 蘇浩 Anthony So Facebook 的最佳貼文
【前港督彭定康錄影發言 促香港政府撤回修訂逃犯條例】
「我希望即使在這個最後階段,政府仍然可以退讓,撤回方案,不要再添亂。這修例不需要通過,亦不應該通過,香港應該繼續是一個有法治、有自由的社會,而不應該面對這些令人憂心的引渡修例。」
發言英文紀錄及中文翻譯:
Former Hong Kong Governor Lord Chris Patten video message Transcript
I know that this week in Hong Kong, thousands of people will be making their views clear, demonstrating against the proposals on extradition, which the government has put forward, extradition to China. It’s a proposal, or a set of proposals, which strike a terrible blow - I think - and so, I think to most people in Hong Kong and so does the international community, against the rule of law, against Hong Kong’s stability and security, against Hong Kong’s position as a great international trading hub. And the surprise is that the government in Hong Kong doesn’t seem to understand that. It does make you wonder sometimes who actually runs Hong Kong these days: is it the Hong Kong government or is it the joint liaison office acting on behalf of the communist regime in Beijing?
Why is this important? Well it’s the latest in a number of things that have happened in recent years which have tightened Beijing’s grip on Hong Kong, and which have profoundly worried people. I think for ten or a dozen years after 1997, things in Hong Kong went pretty well. Of course they could have gone better, I’m sorry that Beijing throttled the development of democracy, much against the promises that have been made earlier. But by and large, I think, Hong Kong remained a very free and successful society.
But ever since the regime in Beijing started to roll back Deng Xiaoping’s reforms and the developments that have taken place under Jiang Zemin and Zhu Rongji and Hu Jintao, and Wen Jiabao; ever since then, with the Party taking control over everything, cracking down on dissidents, cracking down on human rights, locking people up, incarcerating them in Xinjiang and so on. Ever since then, we know that Beijing has also been tightening its grip, or trying to, in Hong Kong. And I think that the latest proposals on extradition are an example of that.
Now a lot of very spurious arguments are put forward, it said that the present situation is a “loophole” which needs to be filled up - that’s absolute nonsense. People have known exactly why there shouldn’t be an extradition agreement with China for years, and many of the arguments put for the government’s proposals don’t actually pass the laugh-off-your-seat test. The argument that, well, it’s better to have an extradition treaty than to abduct people illegally from Hong Kong - are people really supposed to believe that?
Except for, but of course, Western democracies in Europe have extradition agreements with China, but they’re in a very different position to the position that Hong Kong is in. The reason why international chambers of commerce, why lawyers, why business around the world, why governments have raised their objections is very simple: because what these proposals do is to remove the firewall between Hong Kong’s rule of law and the idea of law - which prevails in Communist China - an idea of law where there aren’t any independent courts, where the courts and the security services and the party’s rules - which are, sometimes, pretty obscure - are rolled altogether. That’s why we’ve seen recently Canadian citizens that are locked up are taken as if it were hostage against things happening in Canada itself under the rule of law there. So it’s not surprising that people are so worried about what is happening.
I know that when people talk about the particular problem in relation to Taiwan, the leaders of the Hong Kong Bar Association over the last few years, I think a dozen of them, have put forward proposals which show how you could deal with that issue building on the existing common law.
So these proposals are bad for Hong Kong, they - I think - raise all sorts of questions which the government hasn’t even thought through, not least about Hong Kong’s economic importance and economic stability. We know very well that Hong Kong needs to be treated separately in economic and commercial matters from the rest of China. When I was governor a long time ago, I used to travel to Washington fairly regularly to argue the case for treating Hong Kong differently from, say, Shenzhen and Shanghai. But if you appear to be regarding Hong Kong from Beijing as though it was just another China city, then sooner or later, economic governments around the world, businesses around the world, when they’re looking even at things like the Belt and Road Initiative, they’re going to regard Hong Kong as just another part of China, and that would be really bad for the standard of living, for the quality of life in Hong Kong!
Above all, of course, if we go ahead, if the government goes ahead with this extradition agreement, it will cause unnecessary worries and anxieties in Hong Kong. That’s a really bad thing. I hope that even at this late stage, the government will back off and leave well alone. It doesn’t have to happen, it shouldn’t happen, and Hong Kong should carry on as a free society, under the rule of law, without having to worry about this extradition.
前港督彭定康錄影講話翻譯
我知道這星期在香港,成千上萬的人將會到街上遊行表達自己的意見,反對政府所提出將會容許引渡到中國的引渡修例建議。這是一項,或者應該說是一系列我及國際社會認為將會對香港的法治、香港的穩定和社會安全造成很大打擊的建議,它將會嚴重傷害香港作為一個國際貿易中心的地位。令人驚訝的是,香港政府似乎並不理解這一點。這確實令人懷疑這些日子究竟是誰在管治香港:是香港政府還是代表北京共產黨政權的中聯辦?
為甚麼這修例是這麼重要?這是近年來發生的一系列容許北京強行控制香港的事件之一,而這一直以來都讓人深感憂慮。我覺得在1997年之後的十年至十幾年,香港的情況進展尚算順利。當然,是本來可以更好,我很遺憾北京扼殺了香港民主的發展,違背了之前所作出的承諾。但總的來說,香港在那個時候仍然是一個非常自由和成功的社會。
但是,自北京政權開始推翻鄧小平的改革以及在江澤民、朱熔基、胡錦濤和溫家寶時期所推行的發展以後,共產黨控制着一切,打擊持不同政見的人,打擊人權,在新疆把人民關押等等。從那時起,我們就知道北京一直在試圖加緊控制香港。我認為最新的引渡建議就是一個例子。
現在香港政府提出了許多非常虛假的論點,它說目前的情況是展現了一個需要填補的「洞」,這絕對是胡說八道。大家多年來都確切地清楚知道不應該與中國達成引渡協議的原因。而政府提出的許多論點實際上也沒有一個不令你拍案大笑。政府認為制定引渡條約比從香港非法綁架人民更好,你認真覺得人們應該相信這個說法嗎?
當然他們又會說歐洲的西方民主國家與中國已經簽訂了引渡協議,但它們與香港根本處於完全不同的地位。國際商會、律師、商人及各國政府之所以提出反對意見的原因非常簡單:因為這些修例將會摧毀香港法治與中國共產黨的法治概念之間的防火牆。中國的法律觀念不包括任何獨立的法院,並把法院、國安部門以及黨的規則 (黨規則亦有時相當模糊)完全混在一起。這就是為甚麼我們最近看到被關起來的加拿大公民被用為人質,反對加拿大本身在她自己國家的法治下所發生的事情。因此,人們如此擔心這修例所帶來的影響並不奇怪。
我知道當人們都正在談到與台灣有關的問題之際,過去幾年的香港大律師公會領導人,應該是有十幾位,都已經提出意見,說明你如何就着香港現行的普通法來處理這個問題。
這些修例對香港不利,我認為這些修例所引發的疑問是甚至政府都沒有仔細考慮過的,尤其是對香港經濟重要性和經濟穩定性的影響。我們非常清楚在經濟和商業方面是需要把香港與中國其他地區分開對待。很久以前,當我還是港督的時候,我經常前往華盛頓游說對方看待香港的時候要跟對待深圳和上海之類的中國城市有所不同。但是如果以北京的角度看香港,將香港當為另一個普通中國城市,那麼世界各地的政府及企業將會視香港為中國的一部分(而不是特區),就算是看待「一帶一路」之類倡議時亦會是如此。這對香港的生活水平和生活質素都是非常不利的!
當然,最重要的是如果香港政府繼續硬推這些引渡修例,這將會在香港引起不必要的憂慮和焦慮。這些都是非常糟糕的事情。我希望即使在這個最後階段,政府仍然可以退讓,撤回方案,不要再添亂。這修例不需要通過,亦不應該通過,香港應該繼續是一個有法治、有自由的社會,而不應該面對這些令人憂心的引渡修例。