The rule of law in Hong Kong new generation 香港法治新人類

Image
Many students are waiting to hear about freedoms, human rights and democracy.   They do not have even the basic knowledge to protect their dignity.  Several groups including this website, Scholarism and 讓愛與和平佔領中環 Occupy Central with Love and Peace‘s and 學民思潮 Scholarism are working for students.  Students often  say to me “Thank you for fighting for us, tell the media and I want to speak to the media”.  We are all working on that!
 香港法治新人類//…我觀察到香港年輕一代,對法治的認知較上一代深刻得多。上星期我就出席了一個由年輕人自發籌辦的論壇,更有一名中學生把他十多位同學拉到論壇來。當中我們討論到公民抗命與法治的關係,非常熱烈。年輕人們不是來聽甚麼專家講他自己那一套想法,然後照單全收,而是都能獨立地思考,批判地整理所收到的資訊,經反思後得出一些屬他們自己的信念與價值,去指引他們的行為及面向廣大的社會。我的印象是他們大都能超越狹隘的守法式法治思維,而能跳躍至限權及達義的法治思維。因此,我相信在香港,一代法治的新人類正在成長中。在未來的日子,他們必會對香港的法治發展以至整個社會的管治,帶來新的氣象。//

…經過幾十年的努力,法治在香港社會也可以說是植了根。這可從上世紀七十年代中設立廉政公署開始說起,到現在差不多所有港人,甚至京官,都異口同聲說香港的法治是非常重要,不容破壞。但大家所說的法治,其實只是法治的基本,就是守法。要做到守法,不單是人民守法,更重要是擁有公權力的官員也都能守法。這在中國人歷史中,不可謂不是重大的歷史成果。在中國人的歷史,守法的官鳳毛麟角,有的就必然被人民尊予青天之名。這想法在香港年長一代,仍是非常流行。

這或許是成果,但或許也是悲哀,能守法雖是難得,但人們卻鮮有進一步去問,人民及官員遵守而執行的法是甚麼的「法」。這些「法」是否容讓了在上位者任意地演繹來壓制人民呢?守法之說會否反為這種剝奪人民基本權益的行為蓋上了合理的外衣呢?這些「法」是否經公平的程序制定並公平地執行呢?這些「法」有沒有為人民帶來公義的結果呢?

誠然,守法的法治在中國人社會已是難能可貴,但當守法式法治成為了法治走向限權的法治和達義的法治時的思想障礙時,那麼守法的法治的正面價值就可能被它的負面價值超過了。…

The rule of law in Hong Kong new generation//… I have observed in the younger generation, much deep awareness of the rule of law than the previous generation. Last week, I attended a forum organised by the young people themselves, there is a high school student he pulled over more than 10 students Forum. We talk about the relationship between rule of law and civil disobedience, was very enthusiastic.

Young people are not here to listen to what the experts speak about his own ideas, then do what all, but could think independently, critically organize the information received, upon reflection came to their own beliefs and values, to guide their behavior, and for the majority of the community. My impression is that most of them abide by the rule of law beyond the narrow thinking, and can jump to the limited powers and DaYi’s thought of rule of law. Therefore, I believe that in Hong Kong, a generation of rule of law in the growth of the new human being. In the years to come, they will be on Hong Kong’s rule of law governance of the development community as a whole, brings new weather. //

… After decades of hard work, the rule of law in Hong Kong can be said to be deeply rooted here. Starting from the 70 ‘s of the last century the establishment of the independent Commission against corruption said, by now almost all the Hong Kong people, even natives left, say unanimously that the rule of law in Hong Kong is very important, should not be damaged. But members have said the rule of law, is merely the basic rule of law, is to obey the law. To be law-abiding, not only are people abide by the law, more important is to have public power officials to abide by. In Chinese history, not be described as not a significant historical achievement. In the history of the Chinese people, law-abiding professionals, there must be people’s respect for the name of the blue sky.

This older generation in Hong Kong, is still very popular. This may be the outcome, but maybe the grief, although compliance is hard to come by, but had little further to ask people to implement and officials to comply with the law is “law”. These “laws” are allowed in the position they were supposed to suppress the people? Law say will reverse this deprives people of basic rights has reasonable cover coat it? These “laws” without fair procedures developed and fairly enforced?

These “laws” have to bring justice to the people what was the result? It is true that abide by the rule of law in Chinese society has been rewarding, but abide by the rule of law has become the rule of law to the limit of the rule of law and DaYi ideological obstacles when the rule of law, abide by the rule of law, a positive value is exceeded by its negative value.
… Thammasat essays of the Ming Pao Daily Newshttp://goo.gl/0cdWtc … Huang Zhaoda comic book the Crow Princess 06-Sept-2013 the Ming Pao (Translated by Bing

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “The rule of law in Hong Kong new generation 香港法治新人類

  1. Pingback: Awakening young people build values. 覺醒是年輕人自己建立價值觀. Video | The Journalist "The Tank Man". Standing up for what is right even if you stand alone.

  2. Pingback: Student 有市民送上飲料 Some people brought drinks | The Journalist "The Tank Man". Standing up for what is right even if you stand alone.

  3. Pingback: Student questioned by police. Where is the argument and logic? | The Journalist "The Tank Man". Standing up for what is right even if you stand alone.

  4. Pingback: New Zealand and Australia to Hong Kong. Students learn about other nations to improve Hong Kong. | The Journalist "The Tank Man". Standing up for what is right even if you stand alone.

  5. Pingback: Unjust and inhumane laws need to be challenged in Hong Kong. | The Journalist "The Tank Man" - Standing up for what is right even if you stand alone.

  6. Pingback: Student activists in Hong Kong. The China government must be shaking in their boots. | The Journalist "The Tank Man" - Standing up for what is right even if you stand alone.

  7. 誰能救我?
    香港法治已死-我的經歷
    重點
    1. 廉政公署調查上訴庭法官袁家寧及關淑馨後雖然沒有採取進一步之行動,但她們包庇犯事者(罪犯及涉事之警員)之事實是無從否認的。
    2. 本人曾向梁振英特首及全部立法會議員求助但他們如果不是沒有回應便是敷了事。
    3. 得到警員及法官們的包庇,不明身份之犯事者明目張膽地不斷入侵我家破壞我的物件及千方百計向我下毒。

    事件撮要
    1. 2009年3月我的住宅單位當我不在時不斷遭不明人士入侵,信箱遭到破壞,銀行寄給我的信用咭收不到。我向天水圍警署報案(案件編號09018049)但該警署主管韋垣武警司不肯調查。
    2. 我向投訴警察科投訴後(CAPO NT RN09001123)韋警司指派馮群明督察調查此事。我家每座大厦皆有閉路電視錄影監察。馮督察在此事中包庇犯事者。他說已看過有關錄影帶但並無發現可疑人士。
    3. 警察投訴科對我的投訴全不理會所以我取消我的投訴。
    4. 事情並沒有完結。犯事者繼續入侵我家破壞我的物品。大厦地下管理員又常將大門打開令非住客也可自由出入。我向管理處投訴但不受理。
    2010年5月16日大約下午7:30 我出門時發覺大門被打開,保安員蒙强坐在椅上而頭則俯伏在保安枱上。我多次要求他將門關上但不獲理會
    5. 我向管理處投訴。管理處經理陳志輝先生回信說經過調查後發覺保安員盡忠職守並說出事件的另一板本。我要求陳經理安排我觀看CCTV錄影帶但被拒絕。我向警務署牌照科投訴要求他們對有關保安員採取記律行動。牌照科將調查此事交回天水圍警署。該警署又再指派馮群明督察負責此事。幾經交涉下我終於在2010年6月26日在天水圍警署內觀看該錄影帶,影帶內容和我描述的一模一樣。
    6. 馮督察對此事願跟進。我向韋警司及警察投訴科及監警會投訴並無結果。我向行政長官曾蔭權投訴,曾長官敷衍了事。
    7. 2011年7月18日我向高等法院申請司法覆核(HCA153/2011) 要求高院頒令警務處長,監警會及行政長官正確地處理我的投訴。高等法院法官鍾安德看過文件後拒絕我的申請。
    8. 2011年7月27日我向上訴庭上訴(CACV138/2011)。在我交入法庭的論辯大綱中我從頒發司法覆核命令的條件開始,引用了5條法例及12宗案例說明我此件案件是一件適宜頒發司法覆核的案件。
    9. 此案在2011年10月20日開庭,由袁家寧及關淑馨兩位法官主理。關法官在庭上欺壓我及引導我在庭上說她想我說的話。我向總法官張舉能投訴。張法官將我的投訴信交回2名被投訴的法官處理。
    10. 收到投訴信後關法官仍不避嫌堅持寫判決書而該判決書將事實嚴重扭曲及全無引用我交入法庭的資料。袁法官同意判決書內容及關法官的做法。明顯地她們是有預謀去否決我的申請。
    11. 2011年11月1日我以書面連同有關文件向亷政公署投訴她們(IF/2011/4963)。2012年1月18廉署周先生來電告訴我調查已完畢但他們找不到貪汚的證據。
    12. 2012年8月14日我寫信給現任特首梁振英先生要求他嚴肅處理此事。梁特首回信對我的要求敷衍了事。
    13. 2013年5月6曰我寫信告知梁特首犯事者向我下毒。特首回信建議我報警。
    14. 犯事者不斷千方百計向我下毒,雖然我不相信警方會嚴肅處理,在2013年8月28日我打999電話向警察報案(TSW RN 13027609) 。
    15. 此事我曾向全體立法會議員求助。他們如不是不理會就是敷衍了事。最令我失望的是一向標榜正義敢言維護法治的民主黨及公民黨議員對此事噤若寒蟬。
    16. 中國領導人時常強調香港要依法施政,特首梁振英常說民生無小事。此事關乎我的性命,請特首梁振英高抬貴手,嚴肅處理此事。
    2013年10月14日
    梁偉權
    此事件之文件可在下列連結觀看(需用openoffice軟件)
    https://app.sugarsync.com/iris/wf/D2723445_86586427_93528

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s