Posts

黎智英案 - 答案已寫在牆上的所謂「司法獨立」

黎智英案受外媒及全世界的高度關注,是因為該案將會成為國安法下,首宗於香港最高級法院頒下的重要及終極判決,判案結果及所訂下的原則將約束各級法院,成為所有法官處理國安法保釋案件時必須跟從的案例,影響深遠。

有意見說,黎智英案將是香港法治及司法獨立的寒暑表,甚有參考價值。我卻認為,即使終審法院押後宣判,如何努力再在判詞上雕琢潤飾,其實答案已經寫在牆上。

...

當負責審議黎智英案的五位終院法官,全部都是由林鄭親自挑選「揀蟀」- 國安法甚至容許林鄭於挑選前諮詢北京官員駱惠寧的意見 - 我們仍能對五位被挑選的小蟀有何期望呢?恕我對法庭不敬,但當香港最高級、最有權力的法官,迎著暴政及惡法的步步進逼時,所表現出的卑躬屈膝、逆來順受,我認為他們均不配任何人民的尊敬。在巨人面前,蟋蟀總會被踐踏、輾碎,可能是根本不能改變的物理現象。

再者,終審法院首席法官張舉能竟然與林鄭於上週單獨會面,日子正正是張官審理黎智英案的四日前,事後雙方均沒有新聞公布,被傳媒追問下亦拒絕透露會面內容,亦不予確認是否與國安法及指定法官相關。在沒有半點透明度下,公眾看到的是「司法獨立」,還是「司法配合行政」?這不用法律學者複雜的解釋,而已經是市民百姓所顯然易見的道理,只有於建制內安穩得益、努力維護建制的人,繼續假裝看不見。

多年來,我們看盡法院的判詞,在牽涉政權重大利益的政治案件,總是作出現實考慮,向政治現實低頭:高鐵站一地兩檢案如是、選舉主任DQ案如是、議員宣誓案如是,蒙面法案亦如是,數之不盡,香港法院對維護政權穩定管治,讓其充權膨脹,打壓自由,實在貢獻良多。我敢問,國安惡法如此偏離法治,又有沒有法官敢膽於審理國案案件時,宣判國案法違憲,違反人權?我敢膽說,黎智英案中,最後必然又是法官平衡各方利益作出評論,說法院是何等尊重人權云云,然後又是悄悄宣判政府勝訴。

在凜冽寒風中,我們不再需要寒暑表去證明它的冰冷,不需要再多案例說明法治將死。我們需要的,是讓赤子之心保持燃燒,不至被冰封所冷卻,繼續大聲吶喊,以事實對抗謊言。香港人,讓我們繼續燃燒,在寒風中並肩,繼續撐黎智英及所有被打壓的香港人。

#可能只有流亡人士才可無所畏懼批評法庭

See More

回應匯豐CEO於英國國會接受質詢
許智峯:匯豐願作政權打壓工具 呼籲國際制裁
In response to UK parliamentary session on HSBC
Ted Hui: Call for sanctions over HSBC for assault on freedom
(Please scroll down for English)

...

就傳媒查詢今天匯豐高層於英國國會接受質詢,我的回應如下:

我不接受匯豐高層於英國國會上就我及我家人戶口被凍結的解釋。在會上,匯豐由始至終沒有解釋凍結戶口的法律依據,以及收到警方「通知」需凍結戶口時,銀行一方之行動是否合乎程序等。

我留意到,匯豐行政總裁祈耀年回答議員提問時,清晰表明對凍結戶口的做法感到「舒服」。而當被問到極權政府以凍結戶口打壓異己的做法,除法律以外,是否合乎道德?祈耀年只多次說不適合政治表態,逃避回應。但被問到對香港國安法的取態,及是否支持匯豐亞太區行政總裁王冬勝早前聯署支持國安法,祈耀年卻又突然願意政治表態,表明繼續支持國安法的立場,更荒謬地說該聯署是與香港近三百萬人一同聯署,旨在回應暴力示威的破壞行為, 恢復社會安全等,毫不忌諱對香港保皇黨、港共政權的立場照單全收。被問到為何我家人亦受牽連時,祈耀年表示該做法於警方調查案件時「並非不尋常」,為港警背書。

我認為匯豐高層的回答態度迴避、虛偽及自相矛盾,除了清晰表明繼續支持香港國安法的立場,願作政權打壓工具,更以實際行動侵害香港的自由。我將於國際的遊說工作中,繼續呼籲國際社會制裁匯豐及相關涉案人員,讓匯豐為打壓香港的自由付出代價。

With regards to media enquiries regarding HSBC Chief’s answers to MPs’ questions, my reply is as follows:

I do not accept the explanation of HSBC Chief regarding the frozen accounts of mine and my family. During the parliamentary session, HSBC did not explain the legal basis of freezing the accounts, and whether professional steps were taken and up to guidelines when receiving a ‘notification’ by the Hong Kong Police.

I noticed that HSBC Chief Noel Quinn made it clear that he is “comfortable” with the decisions to freeze the accounts. Being asked by MPs whether it is ethical, the law aside, to freeze accounts of dissidents by the demand of an authoritarian government, Quinn evaded the question and claimed that he “is not in a position to make a political stance”. However, he made an unequivocal stance during the session in supporting the Hong Kong National Security Law (NSL) and that he stands by the decision of Peter Wong, chief of HSBC in Hong Kong, in signing a petition to support the NSL. He even ridiculously said that the petition was signed together with nearly 2.9 million Hong Kongers (which is a fake number) in response to the “destructions made in the violent protests” for Hong Kong to resume social security. This is a complete reception of the stance of the pro-Beijing politicians and that of the Hong Kong CCP regime. As to the question of why my family members are involved, Quinn endorsed the Hong Kong Police that it was “not unusual” when Police investigation is under progress.

In general, HSBC’s attitude was evasive, hypocritical and self-contradicting in today’s hearing. Having made its stance clear that it supports the NSL, HSBC has shown that it is willing to be used for oppressing the freedom of Hong Kong with actual actions. I will continuously call for international sanctions to be imposed on HSBC to let it pay its own price.

See More
Videos
【許智峯私人檢控抗警暴】交代最新發展
2.3K
361
【許智峯民事禁制大陸製有毒催淚彈】庭後見記者
2.8K
261
Photos