幾間大和尚寺都開拖扯友打end game:男拔丶英皇丶聖類斯丶慈幼 #今次到聖租
【聖若瑟書院舊生、學生及教師就《逃犯條例》修訂草案之聯署聲明 | Statement from Old Boys, Students and Teachers of St. Joseph’s College Opposing the Amendment to the Fugitive Ordinance】
——————
ACT NOW!
聯署連結: https://forms.gle/AWD1SvQ49ghToWDw9
聲明(google doc版): https://docs.google.com/…/1SqpExdkHZdeXlxzUGusJd1LHqI…/edit…
——————
(please scroll down for the English version)
特區政府倉猝硬推《2019年逃犯及刑事事宜相互法律協助法例(修訂)條例草案》,激起香港市民以至國際社會強烈反彈。條例草案以司法互助之名,將在港人士引渡到司法獨立存疑的中國大陸受審,人權保障嚴重不足,情況教人擔憂。倘若通過,香港人珍重的自由、法治等核心價值定必再遭削弱。有見及此,我們一眾聖若瑟書院舊生、學生及教師發表聯署聲明,表達對《逃犯條例》修訂之不滿。
香港政府宣稱修訂條例旨在將台灣殺人案疑犯繩之於法,交付台灣審判,同時堵塞逃犯匿藏香港的漏洞。然而,台灣當局明確表示,修例「衍生諸多侵犯人權及人身安全疑慮的關切」。行政院大陸委員會多次強調,在未排除在港台灣人被移送到大陸的威脅之前,即使通過修例,台灣亦不會同意接收本案疑犯。政府希望通過修訂條例「彰顯公義」之說明顯站不住腳。事到如今,即使知道修例無法將台灣殺人案疑犯「繩之於法」,港府仍無意撤回草案,一意孤行。
程序公義是善政的基石。是次修例之過程極為倉猝,公眾諮詢期只有短短 20 日,社會各界無暇充分表達意見。建制派立法會議員為盡快通過條例,漠視議事規則,越權剝奪涂謹申議員主持選舉主席的法定職責。政府後來更認定法案委員會失效,動議將草案逕付大會審議,建制派議員護航通過,立法機關淪為橡皮圖章。
除台灣外,是次修例引起世界各地密切關注。5 月 23 日,美國國會及行政當局中國委員會向香港政府發信,擔心香港修訂逃犯條例將影響目前美國與香港之間的特殊關係,要求當局撤回這項立法修訂。5 月 24 日,歐盟駐港澳辦事處及其成員國外交代表亦向港府發外交照會,正式就「修例可能將在港人士送往中國大陸接受不公平審訊」提出抗議。
4 月 28 日,13萬市民上街遊行,反對修例。然而,政府漠視民意,一再削弱立法會的監督角色,意圖借修例把立法會在處理移交逃犯上的把關角色移除。此舉不僅有破壞三權分立之嫌,更引起港人及國際社會對於香港法治及「一國兩制」的憂慮。若然條例最終通過,美國政府可引用《美國-香港政策法》拒絕給予香港特殊地位,重創本港競爭力及營商環境。
人皆生而自由;在尊嚴及權利上均各平等。香港人引以為傲的制度保障每一個人的自由和基本權利,安定社會民心之餘成就了今時今日的繁榮。是次修例直接衝擊港人一直擁護的價值和宗旨,加上近年司法系統早已飽受侵擾,我們豈能視若無睹?倘若成功修例,代代香港人以血汗換來的長治久安終將毀於一旦,香港再不會擁有自己的名字。
我們一眾聖若瑟書院舊生、學生及教師希望藉聯署聲明表達對《逃犯條例》修訂的不滿。我們要求政府立即撤回草案,考慮社會各界提出「域外司法管轄權」、「賦予法庭實質審查權」、「港人港審」、「日落條款」等其他切實可行的方式處理台灣殺人案。我們始終相信法治、司法獨立和人權等價值對香港極為重要。是次修訂不僅影響香港的國際聲譽,更威脅港人的人身自由及安全。香港是我們的家,守護香港,我們義不容辭。
最後,我們希望兩位若瑟夫——石禮謙議員和林健鋒議員銘記母校教誨,三思而行,為香港以至下一代的未來著想,反對修訂《逃犯條例》。
一羣珍愛香港的若瑟夫
——————
Statement from Old Boys, Students and Teachers of St. Joseph’s College Opposing the Amendment to the Fugitive Ordinance
The HKSAR Government attempted to push the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019 (Fugitive Ordinance Amendment Bill) through in the Legislative Council, sparking public outcry from not only Hong Kong, but also the international community. The Amendment Bill allows individuals in Hong Kong to be extradited to Mainland China, which has a less than credible judicial system. This is particularly worrying. Core values most cherished by Hong Kong people, such as liberty and rule of law, will further diminish. We, old boys, students and teachers of St. Joseph’s College are concerned with the situation, and we would like to express our views through this statement.
In the beginning, the HKSAR Government claimed that the Amendment was intended to bring the suspect of the Taiwan murder to justice. However, the Taiwanese Government indicated that the amendment “brought much attention to possible violation of human rights and personal safety”. On 9 May, the Mainland Affairs Council clearly stated that they would not accept any suspect extradited under the amended ordinance, before a clearance of threat to Taiwan citizens travelling to or residing in Hong Kong, of being transferred to Mainland China. The HKSAR Government’s contention to “uphold justice” simply cannot stand. Given how the events had unfolded, even though the amendment could not longer perform the function of putting away the Taiwan murder suspect, the HKSAR Government had no intention to withdraw the amendment bill.
Furthermore, the procedure to pass the bill is extremely hasty, the public consultation period lasting for only 20 days, there was no sufficient time for the public to voice their opinions. Pro-establishment Legislative Council members attempted to replace the host of the Bills Committee with Abraham Shek, also a pro-establishment councillor, with no regard to the convention of the Legislative Council on hosts, so as to further their cause of rushing through the bill. The Government later announced that the Bills Committee has “lost its function” and will disregard the Bills Committee and table the bill for second reading on 12 June, with no respect for the procedural fairness.
Besides Taiwan, the Amendment has raised international concern. On 7 May, the United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) issued a letter to the HKSAR Government expressing concerns with the special relationship between Hong Kong and the US, demanding the authorities to withdraw the Amendment. On 24 May, the EU Office in Hong Kong and Macau together with diplomatic representatives of its member states issued a formal diplomatic demarche to the HKSAR Government, protesting the “possibility of individuals in Hong Kong sent back to China for unfair trials”.
On 28 April, 130,000 Hong Kong citizens marched on the streets, expressing their discontent in the Amendment. But the Government ignored the cries of the people, and further reduced the legislature’s power to regulate, by attempting to remove the Legislative Council’s power to act as a final guard in fugitive extradition. This does not only undermine the separation of powers, but also raises concern from Hongkongers and the International community on Hong Kong’s rule of law and “One Country Two Systems”. If the Amendment does get passed eventually, it might violate certain key provisions in the “United States - Hong Kong Policy Act”, damaging Hong Kong’s reputation of s safe business environment for American and International corporations. If the US Government cancels the Act in light of the Amendment, it would affect Hong Kong’s special status around the world, grievously damaging Hong Kong’s competitiveness and business environment.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Our system protects each and every one of our rights and freedom, brings order to society. Hong Kong thrived under such privileged circumstances. The Amendment directly impacts the value and morals that we so treasure, on the other hand our judicial system has been wearing away every day for the past few years, we could not turn a blind eye to this. If the Amendment passes, the achievements of a few generations’ hard work and sacrifice will go up in flames. From that point there will be no turning back, Hong Kong will no longer have its own name.
We are old boys, students and teachers of St. Joseph’s College, and we hope to express our concerns and discontent in the Amendment Bill through this statement. We believe that the HKSAR Government should withdraw the Amendment Bill immediately, and consider plausible suggestions from society, like “Extraterritorial Jurisdiction”, “Hong Kong trials for Hongkongers” and “Sunset Clauses”, in order to settle the Taiwan murder. Rule of law, judicial independence, human rights are crucial values to Hong Kong. The Amendment not only damages Hong Kong’s international reputation, but is also a serious threat to the liberty and safety of each and every single Hong Kong citizen. Hong Kong is where we grew up, and we ought to protect it.
We will bravely defend the cause of the right, and march forward with courage in ways that are just.
Lastly, we sincerely hope that while Hon Abraham Shek and Hon Jeffrey Lam, both Josephians, are in their life’s earnest battle, they could be true to their standards learnt from their alma mater, be doing and daring, and for the sake of Hong Kong and future generations, oppose the Amendment.
Josephians who love Hong Kong dearly
hosts 失效 在 周庭 Agnes Chow Ting Facebook 的最佳貼文
我到美國接受了星島中文電台的訪問,當中談及了公民抗命、DQ事件、民主自決等等,最後節目被改名(刪去了「民主自決」的字眼),甚至被下架。自今,星島中文電台仍未有解釋原因。
節目內容和編排,包括解釋民主自決的理念,也是電台一方建議的。如果星島因為政治敏感而將節目下架,為何當初要如此建議?再者,每個人也有談及自己政治主張的權利和自由,也有權不同意或作出批評,作為媒體,何必如此懼怕,要自我審查?
星島中文電台必須盡快清楚解釋,及把節目重新上載網頁,我們需要的是媒體,不是政權的喉舌。
(中文版本在英文版本下方)
==== Press Release: A protest against political censorship by Sing Tao Chinese Radio (AM1400) ====
Agnes Chow 周庭, who was disqualified in the Hong Kong LegCo by-election in January this year, was invited by Stanford Hong Kong Student Association to attend the Cantonese Awareness Week in mid April. Northern California Hong Kong Club had coordinated with the hosts of a current affairs talk show 焦點訪談 of Sing Tao Chinese Radio (AM1400) to arrange Agnes Chow and another ex-Scholarism member appearing in the 4/17 (Tuesday) show.
Everything went smoothly and there were good interaction among the host, the guests and the audience. As usual, the program recording was archived in the show web site (http://www.chineseradio.com/…/%E7%AF%80%E7%9B%AE…/cm-f09-10/) in the same afternoon.
Alerted by a friend, however, we noticed that the recording of this particular episode has gone through sequences of editing and censorship afterward.
1) The title of the episode has changed from "04/17/2018 香港眾志常委周庭闡述香港自決主張" to "04/17/2018 訪問香港眾志常委周庭".
2) Starting from 4/19 (Thu) afternoon or earlier, the link of this episode no longer works while all other older and newer episodes work just fine. (See the attached screen capture: singtao_0421.png.)
In fact, we found out only the MP3 file of this episode (http://archive.chineseradio.com/Archive/C20180417_09-10.mp3) is removed or renamed. The episode one day before (http://archive.chineseradio.com/Archive/C20180416_09-10.mp3) and one day after (http://archive.chineseradio.com/Archive/C20180418_09-10.mp3) are still accessible.
3) We notified the host on 4/19 (Thu) about this issue. Later on, we filed a formal complaint through its official contacts with email and online message board. Not only do we not get any official response, but the operation to block this episode also seems to step up.
4) Starting from 4/23 (Mon) afternoon or earlier, even the web page of the whole talk show archive is removed (screen capture: singtao_0423.png) and a new archive page is created (screen capture: singtao_0424.png). In this new page, however, the 4/17 episode disappears and all other episodes have no title. Besides, this talk show is missing in the archive page of all cantonese programs (screen capture: singtao_cantonese_0424.png). All these appear to be a cover-up for the removal of the episode involing Agnes Chow.
So far, we do not receive any official explanation. Based on the sequences of events, the only logical conclusion is that the blocking is an intended political censorship and not a technical error.
Let us be clear that we had had good working relationship with the hosts in the past. We appreciated their openness and professionalism to invite different spectrum of view points to their program.
We suspect this post-censorship is an intervention from the senior management of the Sing Tao Group, as the political leaning of the owner and the editor in chief of the Sing Tao Group is well known.
We have to ask the Sing Tao senior management:
- Why are you so afraid of a 21-year-old activist has to say?
- The director of HK ETO in San Francisco was willing to attend the panel discussion in Stanford on the very same day (4/17) to debate Agnes Chow head on. Where is your courage?
Although the majority of the mass media in Hong Kong has been influenced directly or indirectly by mainland China or pro-establishment interest, it is a whole different matter when such political censorship happens in the United States. According to the Foreign Agents Registration Act, an organization and persons have to disclose the related activities and finances if they act "at the order, request, or under the direction or control" of a foreign power. As such, we would like to remind our media friends in the United States about the potential consequence of your action.
Northern California Hong Kong Club
2017-04-24
[Background information]
梁建鋒 (Editor in Chief of Sing Tao Group): 百無小政客
https://www.singtaousa.com/…/481534-%E7%99%BE%E7%84%A1%E5%…/
维基百科: 何柱國 (Owner of Sing Tao Group)
https://zh.wikipedia.org/…/%E4%BD%95%E6%9F%B1%E5%9C%8B_(%E5…
Foreign Agents Registration Act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Act
_________________________________________________
==== 4月17日是怎樣被星島中文電台消失的 ====
今年一月在香港立法會補選中被奪去參選資格的香港眾志常委周庭,應史丹福大學香港同學會的邀請,到訪灣區參加四月中旬的廣東話週。北加洲香港會協調安排了周庭與另一位前學民思潮成員,於4月17日(星期二)在星島中文電台(AM1400)「焦點訪談」節目中接受現場訪問。
訪問過程順利,主持人、來賓和聽眾互動良好。當日節目重温一如既往,當天下午即存檔在節目網站(http://www.chineseradio.com/…/%E7%AF%80%E7%9B%AE…/cm-f09-10/)。
然而,一位朋友稍後注意到當曰節目重温連結出現了問題,她把這事情告知我們。我們開始跟進,發現該連結經過一系列的編輯和疑似審查:
1)當日節目重温標題,由原先的“04/17/2018 香港眾志常委周庭闡述香港自決主張”,後被改為“04/17/2018 訪問香港眾志常委周庭”。
2)從4月19日(星期四)下午或更早的時候開始, 當日節目重温連結失效,然而所有其他較新或較舊的節目重温連結仍正常工作。(參閱屏幕截圖:singtao_0421.png)
我們發現只有這一集的MP3語音文件(http://archive.chineseradio.com/Archive/C20180417_09-10.mp3)被刪除或重新命名。 之前一天(http://archive.chineseradio.com/Archive/C20180416_09-10.mp3)和之後的一天(http://archive.chineseradio.com/Archive/C20180418_09-10.mp3)的文件則完好無缺。
3)4月19日(星期四)下午,我們通知星島中文電台主持人有關事宜。之後我們再依正式途徑,用電郵和網上留言投訴。我們不但沒有得到回覆,星島對該節目的屏閉動作反而更進一步。
4)從4月23日(週一)下午或更早的時候開始,整個「焦點訪談」節目的原有重温網頁亦被删除(參閱屏幕截圖:singtao_0423.png),而新建了一個重温網頁(參閱屏幕截圖:singtao_0424.png)。在這個新的網頁中,4月17日消失了,而其他日子亦沒有題目。另外在羅列所有粤語節目的網頁中 (singtao_cantonese_0424.png),「焦點訪談」亦不見了。種種動作,似乎是對周庭訪問重温被消失作掩飾。
到目前為止,我們沒有收到星島中文電台的任何解釋。根據事件的發展時序,唯一合乎邏輯的結論是,封鎖是有意的政治審查,而不是技術上的錯誤。
我們一直與「焦點訪談」節目主持人有著良好的工作關係。我們讚賞他們以專業及開放的態度,邀請不同的觀點的來賓到他們的節目發表言論。
我們認為這次審查是源於管理高層的介入,星島集團主席和總編輯的政治傾向是眾所周知的。
我們必須問星島集團管理高層:
- 為什麼你們如此害怕一個21歲的年青人的言論?
- 舊金山香港經貿辦主任,就在同一天(4月17日)願意出席史丹福大學的香港問題討論會,面對面與周庭同場討論。為何你們沒有這個勇氣?
儘管香港傳媒近年常因中國大陸或親建制勢力的影響,而直接或間接的進行政治審查。但要在美國進行這樣的政治審查,則要面對一種完全不一樣的環境。根據美國“外國代理人註冊法”,如果一個組織和個人,在外國勢力的指揮或控制下行事,他們必須披露相關活動和財務聯繫。我們想提醒身在美國的媒體朋友,注意你們的行為可能引起的後果。
北加州香港會
2017年4月24日