曾焯文:梁天琦入獄,彭定康等英政要痛斥無道 Chapman Chen: UK Politicians like Lord Patten Call Edward Leung’s sentencing Unjustified

Share This:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

梁天琦以暴動罪,判入獄六年,前港督彭定康爵士及其他英國政要表示關注。彭定康話由於公安條例與聯合國人權標準不符,九十年代曾修訂多處,但九七後中國政府欽點之臨時立法會還原惡法。今公安條例竟用於嚴刑對付異見人士,令人失望。御用大狀NICE爵士讚梁天琦後生可畏;話此案監禁刑罰根本無道。為達側面目的,對麻煩青年政治判刑,時常弄巧反拙。英國保守黨人權委員會主席議員FIONA BRUCE斥責香港政府利用法律,嚇窒民主運動,消滅異見聲音,令人髮指。

梁天琦受刑,彭定康批評公安條例。六月十一日,梁天琦以暴動罪,判入獄六年。彭定康及其他英國政要表示關注。根據公安條例,非法集結一旦破壞社會安寧,就變成暴動。梁天琦基於此而被定暴動罪。非法集結,破壞社會安寧,加上可判重刑,令此法備受非議。九十年代,彭定康改革公安條例,與國際標準接軌,但九七年中國政府欽點之臨時立法會還原公安條例。由於公安條例容易濫用,與聯合國人權標準不符,九十年代我們想改革公安條例,修訂多處。如今公安條例竟用於政治,嚴刑對付泛民及其他抗爭人士,令人失望。

聯合國多番強調:公安條例可用以不當限制聯合國公民及政治權利公約第二十一條所保障的權利。 Geoffrey Nice爵士乃係權威御用大狀,曾在海牙法庭領導米洛索維其聯合國大審判,又為訟務律師標準委員會前資深會員,負責管理英國及威爾斯的大狀,擔心嚴刑峻法,以儆效尤的做法。其道:我一七年見過梁天琦,其人文質彬彬,辯才無礙,和譪可親,後生可畏也。青年才俊,因緣際會,必成大器。不能想像,天琦竟因其行動而要在獄中虛耗青春歲月。這位俊秀天資聰穎,才高八斗,知錯能改,今日故意重判,明顯對其毫無裨益,目的只在教日後示威噤聲。此案監禁刑罰根本無道理。紅塵中仍信民主價值者會視為卑鄙而危險的動作。為達成側面目的,對麻煩青年政治判刑,極少奏效,時常弄巧反拙。

梁天琦另一暴動罪由於陪審團未能達成協議,而律政司上訴,需要重審。近年香港有一連串針對民主派人士的政治審訊,梁天琦之判刑最新出爐。

英國保守黨人權委員會主席議員FIONA BRUCE道:判刑不應視為獨立事件。香港政府利用法律,嚇窒民主運動,削減言論自由,已有不少前科,天琦案只是其中之一。自從一四年雨傘運動,三分一泛民議員,超過百位示威人士被檢控,令人髮指。這種打壓對民主運動造成寒蟬效應,迫人自我審查,消滅異見聲音,實在不能接受。

來源:https://www.facebook.com/HongKongWatch1/photos/a.1478139028973232.1073741829.1457138397739962/1661399270647206/?type=3

 

Press Release : Lord Patten criticises Public Order Ordinance following sentencing of Edward Leung

On 11 June 2018, Edward Leung Tin-kei was sentenced to 6 years in jail for rioting. Lord Patten and other UK politicians expressed their concerns about the sentencing.

Edward Leung Tin-kei has been convicted of rioting under the Public Order Ordinance on the basis that an event is a riot if an ‘unlawful assembly’ leads to a ‘breach of the peace.’ The vague definitions of ‘unlawful assembly’ and ‘breach of the peace’, coupled with the extreme potential sentencing, has ensured that the law has been widely criticised.

In the 1990s, Lord Patten reformed the Public Order Ordinance to bring it in line with international standards, but the reforms were reversed by the ‘Provisional Legislative Council’ selected by the Chinese government in 1997.

Lord Patten of Barnes, the last Governor of Hong Kong, said:

‘We attempted to reform the Public Order Ordinance in the 1990s and made a number of changes because it was clear that the vague definitions in the legislation are open to abuse and do not conform with United Nations human rights standards. It is disappointing to see that the legislation is now being used politically to place extreme sentences on the pan-democrats and other activists.’
The United Nations have repeatedly highlighted that ‘the Public Order Ordinance could be applied to restrict unduly enjoyment of the rights guaranteed in article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights’.

Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, a leading barrister who led the UN trial of Slobodan Milosevic in the Hague and was previously the senior barrister member of the Bar Standards Board that regulates the barristers of England and Wales, expressed concerns about the use of extreme sentences as a deterrent. He said:
‘I met Edward in 2017 and was struck by his articulate, gentle, personable character as well as his youth. He is clearly a talented young man who has enormous potential if given a proper chance. I am quite unable to see that Edward’s actions warrant him spending formative years of his life in jail. The sentencing today, clearly designed as a deterrent to mute further protest, will not help this bright, able and penitent young man who deserves a second chance. It is easy to think that imprisonment in this case is simply unjustified. It may be seen as a mean but dangerous act by those in this delicate world who still believe in the values of democracy. Sentencing politically troublesome young men to achieve collateral objective rarely works and often backfires – in the end’
Edward Leung will face a retrial for another rioting charge for which he was previously acquitted.

His sentencing is the latest in a series of political trials against pro-democracy figures. Fiona Bruce MP, the Chair of the Conservative Party Human Rights Commission, said:
‘Edward’s sentencing should not be seen in isolation. It is only one of many examples of the Hong Kong government using the law to intimidate the pro-democracy movement and curtail freedom of expression. It is shocking that one in three pro-democracy legislators and more than one hundred protestors have been prosecuted by the government since the Umbrella Movement of 2014. This is an unacceptable crackdown which has a chilling effect on the pro-democracy movement, forcing people into self-censorship and silencing opposition.’

Lord Patten criticises Public Order Ordinance following sentencing of Edward Leung梁


Share This:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Comments