關於 in regard to中文翻譯 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

【外國月亮不是特別圓】

投入國際連結工作好一段時間，有時覺得大家也會期望「外國月亮總是特別圓」，但其實西方國家政治人物支持香港，從來不是理所當然，當中亦會涉及不少商業利益考慮和國際壓力，以及部份左傾政客仍會不知何故地，對中國共產政權抱有良好幻想，這種情況在歐洲較為明顯。

德國左翼黨的國會議員，竟在國會發言表示「理應支持我們在北京的共產朋友」固然讓人大跌眼鏡，尤其是中共從根本地就是循從威權主義和國家資本主義的極右政黨。

有時對於國際政客不理解香港，也是有點無奈，但我們香港作為國際大都會，對於世界各國的抗爭運動，又何嘗不是缺乏足夠理解，只盼在抗爭持續的情況下，香港人能夠繼續努力，讓世界理解我們，與香港同行。

早前睇一份德國國會內嘅辦論，有位Die Linke嘅議員話要支持中共，因為大家都是左翼共產主義支持者，不用分得那麼細。我見內容有所偏頗就寫左篇文。中文翻譯見下文。
Recently, a MP from Die Linke made some remarks about HK, and say they should support CCP as they are friend of Coummunism. I find the claims rather inaccurate hence I wrote this article to provide some rebuttals. Please scroll down for the English translation.

Article in German: https://www.google.com/…/Hongkong-Krise-Pekings-Regierung-b…

近日德國國會內, 一位Die Linke的國會議員Stefan Liebich對香港的事作出評價，這些評價實在令人難以茍同。

Liebich指「Die Linke理應支持我們在北京的共產朋友」。但中國共產黨除了名字內有「共產」兩個字外，其實際行動與共產理念差天共地，實在不是Liebich想像中共產主義的好朋友。

中國共產黨是一個極權，除了擴張政治與經濟勢力外，中國共產黨什麼都不會理會。不論是無產階級的死活，或者是工人階級，對於中國共產黨來說只是擴張實力的工具，隨時可以為了經濟或政治利益犧牲或捨棄。 中國共產黨實質上是由一群搜刮民脂民膏致富而滿肚腸肥的黨員領導。中國共產黨甚至對自己的人民進行全天候的監控，打壓、拘捕異見人士。

由此可見，中國共產黨本質上是一個極右政黨，而非Liebich以為的左翼。 北京政府不是以共產理念管治中華人民共和國，反而是以物質主義操縱國民。中國背後並沒有一套穩固的價值觀支撐，唯有金錢才是中國人和中國政府信仰的理念。中國的任何行動，從來都不是由價值推動，而總是由金錢和利益推動。

中國共產黨只是一個「掛羊頭賣狗肉」的「共產」黨，它相當擅長扮演共產主義的支持者，與Liebeich想像中「馬克思主義的的同路人」相差甚遠。我們應該要小心分辨真正的共產主義者與打著共產主義旗號行惡的政權之間的分別。

Leibich亦在發言時提到八國聯軍與相關歷史，指「香港被英國以軍事手段從中國手中搶去。撇除對於中國的批評，我們樂見不公義的殖民主義完結」。但現實上，清朝是被當時被視為外族的滿洲人統治。當時的「中國」與今天我們認知的中華人民共和國並不是同一個國家。所以，Leibich所指的「香港被英國不公義的殖民」，其實嚴格來說是鴉片戰爭後，香港的管治權從滿洲人手中交到英國人手中。

清朝末期發生申亥革命，中華民國成立。及後因國共內戰，中華民國政府輾轉於1949年12月撤退至臺灣。如果按照Leibich的邏輯，香港主權理應是移交予中華民國政府，而非中華人民共和國。

另外，香港人本來擁有聯合國1960年在《給予殖民地國家和人民獨立宣言》中賦予非自治領土人民自決前途的權利。但因為中國強烈反對港澳被定義為殖民地，而應為「被英國和葡萄牙當局佔領的中國領土的一部分」。中國代表單方面宣稱港澳的地位，都屬中國主權範圍內，甚至指：「聯合國並沒有權討論這些問題。」最後才令香港再名單中被除名，失去前途自決的權利。

而觀乎而今情況，即使香港主權移交予中國後，不公義不但沒有消失，反而更加明顯與嚴重。Leibeich在發言時指「撇除對於中國的批評，我們樂見不公義的殖民主義完結」，我很希望，他不是指他將無視數以百萬計的少數民族關押在在教育營當中、六四屠城死去的學生、香港早前被實彈近距離射中的兩位男孩、被24小時監控的中國人、捨生取義爭取人權的香港人，而去支持中國共產黨只因其聲稱自己是「共產主義者」。

人權自由是人類文明近百年來的基石，中國共產黨的行為，與絕大部分我們珍視的政治價值並不相容。在任何情況下，我們都不可能支持一個獨裁的殺人政權。

Recently, in the German Bundestag, Stefan Liebich made a few remarks regarding Hong Kong. Mr. Liebeich says his party Der Linke should support their communist friends in Beijing. “Logisch, dass Der Linke Liebich seinen Kommunistenfreunden in Peking wieder den Rücken stärkt.(It is logical that Die Linke Liebich should again support his communist friends in Beijing.)” In my point of view, the Chinese Communist Party is just a party named itself as the “Communist”, what it does in China or in the world is in no way communistic.

PRC is a dictatorship that only takes the expansion of its economic and political power into regard, workers or its people are at its disposal whenever it sees fit. The “Communist” party cares neither about the people, nor the grassroots, it only cares about the economic benefit it gains from its business activities inside and outside PRC. The party leaders are all sitting in their offices with their pockets full of what they gain from exploiting the Chinese workers.
They carry mass surveillance 24/7 throughout China, arrests and detain descendants. Frankly speaking, the CCP is rather right than left.

The Peking Government is not running Communism, but materialism. The only thing the Chinese and the Chinese government worship is the dollar sign, nothing else. They do not take any values or ideology into account. The people are not motivated by values or beliefs, but by the economic benefits they see.

The CCP is not a communist party as Mr. Leibich conceived it is. The CCP is very good at creating the illusion that it represents the Marxist ideas. We should be very careful in examining the differences between those who claim to be communists and those who are communists.

Mr. Leibich also made reference to the history of the Eight-Nation Alliance in the late Qing Dynasty, saying that“ Auch Hongkong ist durch die britische Armee militärisch China abgepresst worden.(Hong Kong has been militarily squeezed out of China by the British army.)” and “Bei aller notwendigen Kritik an der chinesischen KP sagen ich: Es ist gut, dass dieses koloniale Unrecht zu Ende ist. (Despite all the necessary criticism of the Chinese Communist Party, I say: It is good that this colonial injustice has come to an end.)”

It is worth clarifying that during that time of History, China was ruled by the Manchus, who were considered as foreigners at the time. China at the time was not the Republic of China we know today. Therefore, Hong Kong was not military squeezed out of PRC but was being colonized by the British in substitution of the Manchus at that time.

Historically speaking, the successor of the Qing Dynasty is the Republic of China, which later was relocated to Taiwan due to the Civil War between 1927 and 1949. And Mr. Leibich’s claim that it is good that colonial injustice has come to an end is inaccurate, too. In this case, Hong Kong, ought to be returned to Taiwan (the Republic of China) but not China (People’s Republic of China), to end the colonial injustice.

What is more, Hong Kongers were supposed to be able to exercise our right to self-determination and really being able to be free from colonialism. Yet Hong Kong was actually removed from the U.N. list of Non-Self-Governing Territories upon PRC’s request.

And clearly, under PRC’s rule, injustice is more than just apparent in Hong Kong currently. Mr. Leibich’s remarks of “despite all the necessary criticism of the Chinese Communist Party”, I truly hope that he is not suggesting that one would neglect the millions of ethnic minorities being detained in re-education camps, those who died in the JuneForth Masaccare, the two young Hong Kong boys who were shot by live rounds, the Chinese who were placed under surveillance 24/7 and all my fellow Hong Konger who are fighting for fundamental rights with their lives, but support the CCP’s action because it claims to be a communist party.

I see of no reason, why anyone should support a dictatorship that would brutally murder its own people. CCP is totally going against what most political ideologies in the world stand for, and I do believe we can all agree on the fundamental rights of all members of the human family that ought to be respected as that is the foundations of human civilization.

以下係我已經喺WhatsApp收咗三次嘅前高等法院英女王御用大律師，Henry Litton (列顕倫)* QC ；給香港市民的一封信:～ (裏便了無新意, 不過有兩個好處. 1) 洋人寫係唔同啲, 仲要係有名望嘅大法官, 特別有說服力 2）啲英文寫得好靚, 仲有中文翻譯可以學習英文。

Henry Litton (列顕倫)* QC was the Judge of the highest Court in Hong Kong. He retired in 2015.

英女皇御用大律師列顕倫(亨利·利頓)QC，是香港最高法院的法官。他於2015年退休。

The following is what he’s written...

以下是他寫的。

There are few certainties in life. One of them is this: The common law system underpinning Hong Kong’s “core values” is destined to expire in 27 years’ time. The One Country Two Systems formula was designed to last for 50 years and no more. Hence Article 5 of the Basic Law. There is no mechanism in the Basic Law for the system to continue beyond 30 June 2047.

生活中很少有確定性。其中之一是：支撐香港“核心價值”的普通法制度將在27年後失效。一國兩制方案的設計時限是50年，之後，再也沒有了。因此，“基本法”第五條清楚指出。2047年6月30日以後，“基本法”中沒有任何機制讓這制度繼續下去。

All the calls for Freedom, Democracy etc have no meaning if the common law crumbles.

如果普通法崩潰，所有要求“自由、民主”等的呼籲都是沒有意義。

If the protesters truly value their professed aims, *their focus should be on demonstrating to Beijing and to the rest of the world that the One Country Two Systems formula works, and to promote an atmosphere in which Beijing feels comfortable with the system – and when the time comes, to extend the Basic Law for another 50 years, 100 years*. Then liberal democratic norms and values might have a chance to flourish.

如果抗議者真的誠心誠意的重視他們宣稱的目標，*他們的重點、重心，應該是向北京和世界其他地方展示“一國兩制”的方案是有效的，並推展“一國兩制”的成功實施。令北京對這一制度感到寛心舒泰的環境下 - 當時機成熟時，說服北京將“基本法”再延長50年，100年*。那麼，自由、民主的模式、準則和價值觀還可能有延續蓬勃、活躍的機會。

Crunch time is not 27 years away. It is just round the corner. For Hong Kong to continue as one of the world’s greatest financial and trading centres, planning for the future must necessarily look 20 -30 years ahead. So the hard question will soon be asked: is the common law system to continue beyond June 2047 ? The answer lies in Beijing and nowhere else.

擔心不安的時刻不是27年後的事。就在拐角處。要使香港繼續成為世界上最大的金融和貿易中心之一，對未來的規劃必須著眼於未來20-30年。因此，我們很快便會提出一個棘手的問題：普通法制度是否會延續至2047年6月以後？答案就在北京，而不是其他任何地方。

The last time this issue arose – back in 1982 – Hong Kong had the backing of Great Britain. This time Hong Kong stands alone. And, up to this point, Hong Kong has demonstrated for all the world to see that the One Country Two Systems formula is extremely fragile: and, if the unrest continues, it would surely fracture beyond any hope of recall.

回顧1982年，上一次被問到這個問題的時候，當時香港是得到了大英帝國的支持。而這一次，香港只能孤掌難鳴。到目前為止，香港已經向全世界展示了“一國兩制”這方案是極其脆弱的：如果動亂繼續下去，它肯定會褫奪，無望地被撤銷。

It is beyond the power of the Hong Kong SAR government to devise the governing model for the future. Pressing the Hong Kong government to promote greater democracy is futile. Rightly or wrongly, that power lies in Beijing. Nowhere else. Hong Kong enjoys freedoms found nowhere else in China. To think that unlawful assemblies and demonstrations, and violence in the streets, would soften Beijing’s attitude towards Hong Kong is absurd. Common sense suggests it would have the opposite effect.

為未來設計治理模式，是超出了香港特別行政區政府的權力範圍。要迫使香港政府促進更大的民主是徒勞的。不管是你喜歡也好。不喜歡也好。權力就是在北京。沒有別的地方了。香港現在享有中國其他地方沒有的自由。認為非法集會示威和街頭暴力會軟化北京的對香港的態度是荒謬的。常識表明，它只會產生相反的效果。

But there are deep social issues which the SAR government can redress, having regard in particular to the huge foreign currency reserves it holds:USD425 billion – by far the largest in the world, enough to guarantee public servants’ pensions hundreds of times over. And yet Hong Kong’s social services are crumbling, hospitals are understaffed, public education is poor, teachers are ill-paid, young people cannot afford to rent even the most substandard apartment, the gap between rich and poor is ever-widening.

但是，有一些深層次的社會問題是特區政府可以解決的，特別是考慮到特區政府擁有世界上最龐大的外匯儲備：4,250億美元 - 是政府公務員的長俸所需要的保證金額的數以百倍。然而，香港的社會服務卻每況愈下，醫院人手不足，全民所需的教育不論在質素及資源都極差，教師薪酬偏低。年輕人怎都難以負擔租用即使是最不合標準的居所，社會上，貧富差距在不斷拉大。

The laissez-faire policy of the colonial government has been carried to extremes by the SAR government in the past 20-odd years. The rich have prospered in the meanwhile whilst the bulk of the people suffered. The influx of Mainlanders under the One-Way Permit system has caused great strain on all services. The people’s needs have been neglected. The young see little prospect of a fulfilling future and even university graduates find difficulty in meaningful employment.

大英帝國殖民地政府的自由放任政策在過去二十多年來一直被特區政府極端化。與此同時，大多數富人們卻在此期間更加繁榮昌盛、更加富裕起來，而相反普通市民却受苦了。在單程證制度下，內地人士大量湧入，對所有服務造成更大壓力。市民的需求、需要被忽視。年輕人看不出有向上游、向上流的任何富圖的希望。甚至大學畢業生也很難找到有合識、合意的工作。

These, I suggest, are the deep-seated ills which sustain the fire of discontent in the wider community, and bring hundreds of thousands to march in the streets. These are not matters which a commission of inquiry can resolve.

我認為，這些水深火熱的社會問題及弊病，這些憤懣之火已經廣泛地蔓延在整個社會，並促使數以十萬人走上街頭。這些都不是一個所謂諮詢委員會可以解決。

The media here is full of Hong Kong stories, and of course footage of the riotous behaviour on the streets: what empty slogans, meaningless rhetoric the protesters display ……….In watching these events I am reminded of the prayer attributed to Saint Francis:

今天的媒體充斥著不同形式的香港事件，當然有街頭暴力行為的鏡頭：抗議者們展示的空洞口號和毫無意義的粗言穢語。…當我在觀看這些事件時，‘我想起聖弗朗西斯的禱告：

Pray God give me the courage to change the things I can change, the fortitude to bear the things I cannot change, and the wisdom to know the difference.

願上帝賜給我勇氣去改變我能改變的事情，給我勇氣去承受那些我無法改變的事情，給我智慧去分辨其中的黑白。

I arrive in Hong Kong Thursday 24 October, staying for one month.

我在今年的10月24日星期四抵達香港，逗留一個月。

As ever
如常，祝願香港

H

列顕倫

PS Please feel free to convey these observations to anyone you chose ………….They are *not confidential*.

歡迎隨時將我這些意見傳達給你所選擇的任何人.此文是*不保密的*。

【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。