【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,...
「social unrest中文」的推薦目錄:
- 關於social unrest中文 在 Charles Mok 莫乃光 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於social unrest中文 在 健吾 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於social unrest中文 在 黃傑龍 Simon - 窮富翁 好人好事 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於social unrest中文 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於social unrest中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於social unrest中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於social unrest中文 在 PS4 Switch【騷動:內亂(Riot Civil Unrest)】中英文合版預告 的評價
- 關於social unrest中文 在 Zuckerberg's dilemma: How to moderate Facebook amid ... 的評價
- 關於social unrest中文 在 Youtube in china 的評價
social unrest中文 在 健吾 Facebook 的最佳貼文
中大明天繼續停課。所有同學請注意人身安全。
【中大宣布明天(11月12日)繼續停課】
鑒於社會情況持續惡化,公共交通服務受到嚴重影響,加上校園多處地方及設施損毀,復修需時,香港中文大學 (中大) 宣布明天 (11月12日)課堂將會取消。至於在中環美國銀行中心的課堂,同學可向其所屬學系 / 學院查詢相關安排之詳情。
同學及同事的安全是大學的首要考慮。大學呼籲同學及各部門員工盡量遠離危險,留在安全的地方。各部門員工如果有安全上的顧慮,可以不必返回辦公室。各學系及單位應彈性處理個別教職員因交通問題而遲到或缺席的事宜。
【 CUHK announces cancellation of classes tomorrow (12 November) 】
Considering the worsening social unrest, the severely affected public transport services, and that repair to the damaged facilities on campus takes time, The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) announces that all classes will be cancelled tomorrow (12 Nov). For classes to be conducted at the Bank of America Tower, Central, students may contact the respective Faculty/Department for further details.
The safety of our students and colleagues is always the University’s top priority. The University urges all students and staff members to avoid danger and stay at safe locations. There is no need to travel to work unless safe to do so. All unit heads should exercise flexibility when handling the attendance or punctuality of individual staff members due to traffic problems.
social unrest中文 在 黃傑龍 Simon - 窮富翁 好人好事 Facebook 的最佳貼文
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*。
social unrest中文 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最佳解答
social unrest中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
social unrest中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
social unrest中文 在 Zuckerberg's dilemma: How to moderate Facebook amid ... 的推薦與評價
“If we were entering a period where there may be a prolonged period of civil unrest,” he told one employee, “then that might suggest that we ... ... <看更多>
social unrest中文 在 Youtube in china 的推薦與評價
Some nations have limited access to particular types of content on YouTube, claiming it could ignite political or social unrest, while others have blocked ... ... <看更多>
social unrest中文 在 PS4 Switch【騷動:內亂(Riot Civil Unrest)】中英文合版預告 的推薦與評價
... <看更多>