倫敦香港監察譴責中國政治篩選,再度DQ劉小麗(曾焯文報導)Hong Kong Watch Condemns China for Continuing Political Screening with the DQ of Lau Siu-lai (Chapman Chen reports)

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

 (Eng. version below)

倫敦人權組織香港監察Hong Kong Watch譴責當局取消劉小麗參選立法會補選資格,聲明如下:該決定違反參加自由公正選舉的權利。劉小麗原來已經直選,成為立會議員,但全國人民代表大會常務委員會詮釋基本法第一零四條,然後追溯應用於劉小麗先前的宣誓方式,取消其議員資格。北京當初奇離釋法,追溯DQ劉小麗,不啻侵犯她的人權。今勻選舉劉小麗早改弦換轍,採取更溫和的政治立場,但當局仍取消其參選資格,誠然武斷,相當於北京政治篩選不中意的候選人。
這決定的關鍵問題乃係基本法第一零四條的「解釋」。這個「解釋」並非單單解釋香港特別行政區的小憲法(北京據憲法有權這樣做),而係違憲修改本地法律,侵犯香港高度自治權。該解釋也未能充分保護言論自由與共參加自由公正選舉的權利,這些權利受香港基本法第三十九條和中英聯合聲明保障。人大釋法追溯應用,違反普通法基本原則,促進廣泛政治篩選,因此民主派常常被迫選擇「B計劃」參選人。這在自由開放社會並不可以接受。

Source:

https://www.hongkongwatch.org/all-posts/2018/10/12/political-screening-continues-with-disqualification-of-lau-siu-lainbsp

 

Hong Kong Watch view: Political Screening continues with the DQ of Lau Siu-Lai

Hong Kong Watch condemns the disqualification of Lau Siu Lai from being a candidate in the upcoming by-election. The decision is in breach of the right to stand in free and fair elections. Lau Siu Lai was originally disqualified during the ‘oath-taking’ saga when an interpretation of Basic Law Article 104 was made by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, and then applied retroactively to her oath. Her original disqualification retrospectively was a breach of her human rights following a problematic ‘interpretation’ of the Basic Law by Beijing. Her subsequent disqualification from candidacy, despite her taking a different and more moderate political stance in the run-up to the current election, is an arbitrary decision and amounts to the political screening of candidates Beijing does not like.

A key problem with the decision is the ‘interpretation’ of Basic Law Article 104. Rather than merely interpreting the mini constitution of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, as Beijing is constitutionally entitled to do, this ‘interpretation’ was an unconstitutional amendment to local laws and thereby an infringement on Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy. The interpretation also failed to adequately protect freedom of expression or the right to stand in free and fair elections, which are guaranteed by Article 39 of the Hong Kong Basic Law and the Sino-British Joint Declaration. It was applied retroactively, in breach of basic common law principles, and it has facilitated widespread political screening so that the pro-democracy camp routinely is forced to select a ‘plan B’ candidate. This is unacceptable in a free and open society.


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

Comments