Theatre of the absurd for real (Lee Yee)
Carrie Lam said last week she was not worried about “being included on the sanction list” and had no assets in the U.S., nor did she aspire to America, so without a visa, she might as well exclude America from the list of countries she would travel.
Being the Chief Executive of Hong Kong and asked whether she was concerned about being picked on by a foreign country, she should have answered appropriately that she was worried about the overall Hong Kong issue instead of uttering personal affairs. In fact, her son is doing his doctorate in America. If the sanction against her threatens his resident visa, how could she not be worried? Worse still, if the sanction is stringently put in force, the banks that service the sanctioned will become embroiled, and will thereby revoke the accounts of the latter.
Chip Tsao said on his Facebook page, “Her saying ’I have no assets in the U.S.’, deemed by netizens in the mainland an innuendo against members of the Chinese Communist Party(CCP) moving their assets to America, has unexpectedly made her one-night heroine in the mainland.” Some mainland netizens said they were moved by the firmness and unyieldingness of Carrie Lam, and if all their officials and party members were the same as Carrie Lam, no one would give a damn about the U.S.’s sanctions.
The media disseminated that the U.S. government is considering banning all CCP members and their families from traveling in the U.S. and expelling those currently in the U.S.. When White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany was asked about it, she answered that she had nothing to announce regarding that aspect, but with respect to issues about China, they reserved every possible option. It means the abovementioned measure is not obviated.
Global Times Chief Editor Hu Xijin said on his Weibo page: “This has been the most insane envision of U.S.’s diplomatic measure made by Washington, D.C. so far, and leaking the news to the media is also an evil act”. Mainland netizens jeered at him by saying, “What are you jittering at, Hu? Now that you are so contemptuous of American Imperialism, why do you take a U.S. visa to heart? A ban on CCP members and their families from traveling in America is no big deal. We don’t care for it! It has nothing to do with ‘insaneness’ and ‘evilness’. ”
Honestly, “insaneness” and “evilness” are just words of exaggeration. In actuality, the measure pertains to U.S. domestic affairs. The U.S. Immigration Act stipulates that all subordinates to communist party and members of its affiliates cannot enter or immigrate to the U.S., surely with clauses of exemption. If the U.S. wants to do it, it can simply enforce it without unnecessary legislation.
Carrie Lam‘s “not worried” and Hu’s “insaneness” have in fact laid bare their genuine worries at heart. When sanctions befall individuals, it is all about personal interests instead of state’s interests. Carrie Lam’s son is in the U.S.; Xi Jinping’s daughter is said to be in the U.S.; a lot of other officials’ offspring and assets are also in the U.S.. It seems that the sanctions will be extended to the U.K. and other countries.
The National Security Law takes the cake. In less than a month since its promulgation, the U.S. and China have been at daggers drawn with each other. It has also put China in a situation in which it is beleaguered by countries all around the world. All of these amount to the theatre of the absurd. Everything stems from a book about Xi Jinping’s private life to be published. Then, five stakeholders of Causeway Bay Books disappeared. It was suspected that Paul Lee, one of the owners, was carted off to the mainland. Amidst an uproar in the media, the extradition amendment bill was tabled for deliberation early last year upon the question “Why can’t we nab a person in Hong Kong?” put forward by Beijing. “Extradition to China” was to be legalized by communist Hong Kong in collaboration with China so that cross-border law enforcement would be made legitimized. However, the backlash from Hong Kong people against it was unexpectedly ferocious and extensive, even making an impact on the international community. After the withdrawal of the bill, the National Security Law, which is even sterner, was then introduced. To everyone’s surprise, the evil law triggered off backfire from all around the world, followed by countries laying siege to China in tandem on end.
How to make an elephant out of a fly
What is weirdest is Carrie Lam tabled the extradition amendment bill to allegedly remedy a “loophole” in the extradition treaty with Taiwan, yet in the end she prompted those countries including the U.S., Canada, Australia, the UK and Finland that have signed an extradition treaty with Hong Kong to rescind the treaties which were based on the promise that criminals would not be extradited to China. With the National Security Law having taken effect, the basis is gone. More countries are believed to follow suit.
The loophole is not remedied, but keeps on festering. There could be a complete collapse of Hong Kong and China’s diplomatic relations with the world. The calamity stems from just a little book. What else could be more absurd?
australia extradition treaty 在 本土研究社 Liber Research Community Facebook 的最讚貼文
#反送中 #撤回惡法
// 若然無法確保犯人有足夠人權保障,Day One 就不應建立引渡關係,絕非特區政府一句「相信」,便將香港人送往沒有人權保障的國度 //
───────
█ 解密過去🔓重掌未來 █
💰捐款支持:http://bit.ly/2IVW56L
📖研究成果:https://medium.com/@decodinghkshistory
🗂計劃詳情:https://researchforfuture.hk
📱instagram:https://www.instagram.com/decodinghkshistory
📧聯絡 #香港前途研究計劃: m.me/decodinghkhistory
【一句「相信」就可令大陸保障人權?】
建制派集體聯署要求提高移交門檻到七年或以上,惟料不到12小時,保安局局長李家超已經極速「𦧲飯應」接納建議。相反,繼歐盟28國等反對後,美國商會再度發表強硬聲明表達「不收貨」,要求政府澄清如何釋除外界的擔憂以免香港國際樞紐的地位受損(註一);英加亦罕有發表聯合聲明,指修訂有損《中英聯合聲明》所保障的人權自由(註二),但只獲特區政府「冷處理」。種種跡象可見,特區政府只求「箍夠票」,完全無視國際社會反對修例背後、對於大陸司法制度的不信任。
坊間較少觸及的便是李家超所謂的「人權保障」,即移交時會加入「公開審訊」、「有律師代表」等要求。但當記者多次問到大陸反口時,特區政府如何應對,李家超只道「好深信呢啲承諾必然會履行」。這顯示所謂人權保障只是一紙空話,沒有解決外界擔心的司法不公問題,一旦大陸「反口唔認數」,出現央視認罪、秘密庭審,特區政府完全是無計可施。
正正是條文上無法保證大陸不反口,香港過往與外國簽署引渡協議時,千方百計防止香港與大陸不公的司法制度接軌。根據解密檔案,香港起初以一份「範例協議」(model agreement),與各商討引渡協議,但範例協議本身沒有條文防止逃犯再移交至中國大陸或其他地方。
為了堵截漏洞,荷、美、澳、加等國與香港商討引渡時,異口同聲要求加入條文防範。譬如荷蘭代表與香港商討引渡協議直言,大陸司法制度,以及大陸法院能否維持公平公正的審訊水平與別不同(its totally different judicial system and standards of justice),故要求加入「不再移交條款」,確保在沒有外國同意下,疑犯不會被送到其他地區。
美國立場更加明確具體地針對中國,表明未得到美國同意,疑犯不會再移交到中華人民共和國(assurance that a person extradited to Hong Kong will not be transferred involuntarily [deported, even] to the PRC)。由此可見,香港與外國的引渡協議,從一開始就建基於香港與大陸之間的「不引渡」。
回到今日,《逃犯條例》修訂比當年影響更深,送到大陸的不再是當年所擔憂、移交到香港的疑犯,而是更進一步,影響任何一位在香港生活甚或只是路經香港的香港人及外國人,但港府貿然與大陸建立引渡關係、所謂人權保障只是聊備一格。
事實上,是否有機制保證犯人得到公平審訊,從來是各國與中國簽訂引渡協議前的重大考量。例如與中國簽訂引渡協議、12年仍未完成本地立法的澳洲,其中一個死因便是無法保證中國會有公平審訊。澳洲律師公會甚至直言,即使澳洲單方面要求中國履行公平審訊,但最後只能「仰賴決策者的酌情權,亦受到不同因素影響」(a bilaterial discussion … to discess specific fair trial concerns would rely on the discretion of both States. This discretion may potentially be influenced by a wide range of factors)(註三),故保障並不足夠。換言之,中方不做亦無可奈何,亦是澳洲迄今仍未落實中澳引渡協議的原因。
可見在外國眼中,若然無法確保犯人有足夠人權保障,Day One 就不應建立引渡關係,絕非特區政府一句「相信」,便將香港人送往沒有人權保障的國度。
註一:American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong. Press release: Proposed Fugitive Offenders Ordinance. https://www.amcham.org.hk/…/press-release-proposed-fugitive…
註二:Foreign & Commonwealth Office. UK and Canada joint statement on Hong Kong. https://www.gov.uk/…/uk-and-canada-joint-statement-on-hong-…
註三:The Law Council of Australia. Supplementary Submission – Australia – China Extradition Treaty. https://www.lawcouncil.asn.au/…/3151_-_S_-_Supplementary_Su…
參考檔案:
1992 FCO 40/3773 Hong Kong Extradition Agreement with France
1991 FCO 40/3399 Hong Kong Extradition Agreement with the Netherlands
1991 FCO 40/3400 Extradition Agreement with Third Countries General
1991 FCO 40/3402 Extradition agreement between Hong Kong and the USA
───────
前途研究計劃(前研)請大家喺medium follow 與 claps(可以每篇文拍 50 吓手),每下掌聲都會化作前研嘅收入來源,請畀多啲掌聲研究員 👏👏👏
◤唔駛等到 2049 系列 • 一◢
http://bit.ly/2VGFeuY
◤反送中系列◢
七)一句「相信」就可令大陸保障人權?
http://bit.ly/2XjNEp5
六)與世界脫軌
http://bit.ly/2VS716Q
五)No agreement is better than a bad agreement
http://bit.ly/2YhLmGS
四)沒有中港區隔下的美港關係
http://bit.ly/2LBdHGP
三)讓惡法多睡一會
http://bit.ly/2Jf8Lpc
二)《逃犯條例》修訂「殺到埋身」
http://bit.ly/2H9WYGi
一)立會反擊戰:林鄭的謊言
http://bit.ly/2Jb6sDq
───────
「香港前途研究計劃」由香港眾志 Demosistō、本土研究社 Liber Research Community及一眾年青學人發起。透過重點檔案的分析研究,重新認識香港史,以及為當下香港各種問題論述提供扎實的基礎。
───────
█ 解密過去🔓重掌未來 █
💰捐款支持:https://donorbox.org/dhkh
📖研究成果:https://medium.com/@decodinghkshistory
📱instagram:https://www.instagram.com/decodinghkshistory
📧聯絡 #香港前途研究計劃: m.me/decodinghkhistory
australia extradition treaty 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳貼文
// 英國和港英政府皆認為這是「潘朵拉的盒子」,萬萬碰不得,副政治顧問Bradley指出,香港與廣東一旦達成非常規引渡安排,則會惹來其他與香港簽訂引渡協議的國家擔心(well cause concern to those partners with whom we have negotiated),皆因移交到香港的疑犯有機會引渡到中國大陸,與今天不少法律專家憂心其他國家或會取消與香港簽訂的協議的看法不謀而合。
有趣的是,檔案揭示中國當年亦承認自身引渡法律仍未成熟,故向英方表示決定暫不處理引渡問題,待時機成熟時才處理(when time was ripe)。中國外交部在1988年7月向時任英國駐華大使館副代表貝爾斯(Alyson Bailes)提及司法互助協議問題,席間承認自己引渡等刑事合作的法律並不成熟(Domestic law relating to such matters as extradition was inchoate),加上香港問題的複雜性,建議中英只限於民事及商業司法互助合作。 //
《逃犯條例》修訂「殺到埋身」,港人普遍擔憂中國會伺機用刑事案件包裝政治「罪行」,將在港國民或香港居民、甚至外國人引渡至內地,變相將「全國性法律」伸延至香港。然而,《逃犯條例》「小護法」譚惠珠,反指控香港人睇內地法治「黑鼆鼆」,無視大陸近年推動「陽光司法」、「內地法治受世界上最先進、最民主的國家接受」,怪責香港人「坐井觀天」。
翻查解密檔案,30多年前中英兩國亦曾商討司法互助,然而31年後的今日,中英雙方仍未就引渡法達致任何協議,更遑論與美國、加拿大等簽訂引渡協議,中國即使1998年簽署《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》, 但迄今仍未批准相關公約去保障公平審訊(註一)。在不成熟的法律體系下,譚惠珠口中的「陽光司法」根本沒有現實基礎。
我們從檔案中亦看到不少資料,印證是次《逃犯條例》修訂,絕對弊多於利。英方80年代末拒絕與中方討論引渡問題,便是擔心中國透過英屬香港將「逃犯」「再引渡」至中國,故將司法互助局限於民事和商業案件。1992年,傳媒披露當時已成港英棄將、轉投中方懷抱的時任港事顧問譚惠珠到訪深圳公安局,根據消息譚或與中方談及九七後中港之間的非常規引渡問題(rendition agreement),令港英政府非常擔心。當年,港英政府因應90年代跨境暴力案件日益嚴重,確有認真考慮與中方洽談協議。
然而,英國和港英政府皆認為這是「潘朵拉的盒子」,萬萬碰不得,副政治顧問Bradley指出,香港與廣東一旦達成非常規引渡安排,則會惹來其他與香港簽訂引渡協議的國家擔心(well cause concern to those partners with whom we have negotiated),皆因移交到香港的疑犯有機會引渡到中國大陸,與今天不少法律專家憂心其他國家或會取消與香港簽訂的協議的看法不謀而合。
有趣的是,檔案揭示中國當年亦承認自身引渡法律仍未成熟,故向英方表示決定暫不處理引渡問題,待時機成熟時才處理(when time was ripe)。中國外交部在1988年7月向時任英國駐華大使館副代表貝爾斯(Alyson Bailes)提及司法互助協議問題,席間承認自己引渡等刑事合作的法律並不成熟(Domestic law relating to such matters as extradition was inchoate),加上香港問題的複雜性,建議中英只限於民事及商業司法互助合作。
然而,中國內地法律體系過去數十年有否向前邁進?時機真的成熟了,讓中方如此有信心令港人放下戒心?譚惠珠極力為中方說項,聲稱部分先進國家已與中國簽訂引渡協議,證明外國認可中國法律制度。但港人單看以下成績單,絕對難以放下戒心:首先,與中國簽署引渡協議的先進國家,實在寥寥可數,而在已簽訂協議的國家,過去的中國申請的引渡案例都引起極大爭議,例如近月涉嫌透過安插罪名,向法國申請將國際刑警前主席孟宏偉妻子引渡回國,令其「收聲保平安」等等。
而部分與中國已簽訂協議的國家,因國會反對和人權組織高度關注,遲遲未有執行協議,例如澳洲2007年與中國簽訂引渡協議,12年來從未執行,澳洲政府在2017年嘗試在國會闖關,惟因朝野狠批中國法律制度及人權紀錄乏善可陳、條文無法保障會對涉及不公正審訊(unjust or opprsesive)的引渡要求「say no」(註二),最後被迫撤回(註三)。可見,連簽署國都覺得內地法治「黑鼆鼆」,特區政府竟然毫無意欲回應這些人權及公平審訊的質疑,只是口號式地要求香港人「相信內地法治」。
可悲的是,香港未有真正民主,澳洲即使簽訂一條不適當的協議,仍可花長達12年去「驗屍咁驗」討論具體落實條文,反觀特區政府竟然只花20日「諮詢」公眾、前後只花兩個月時間去審議一條禍延後代的法律條文。香港更不是一個主權獨立的國家,難以相信特首會對自己老闆的引渡要求「say no」。可預視通過《逃犯條例》修訂,香港人變相受內地刑法管制,結果只會是全國性法律的延伸。
參考資料:
FCO40/2595 Agreements on judicial assistance
FCO40/3774 Extradition and rendition with China
註一:
Treaty on Extradition between Australia and the People's Republic of China (2016). Parliament of Australia. Retrieved from
https://www.aph.gov.au/…/Extradition-Ch…/Report_167/section…
註二:
Explainer: why the government ‘pulled’ Australia’s extradition treaty with China (2017-03-28). The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/explainer-why-the-government-pu…
註三:
Australian Vote on Extradition Treaty With China Is Canceled (2017-03-28). The New York Times. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/…/malcolm-turnbull-china-extraditio…
───────
前途研究計劃(前研)响 medium 梳理咗送中條例系列文章,請大家 follow 與 claps(可以每篇文拍 50 吓手),每下掌聲都會化作前研嘅收入來源,請畀多啲掌聲研究員 👏👏👏
◤唔駛等到 2049 系列 • 一◢
http://bit.ly/2VGFeuY
◤反送中系列◢
六)與世界脫軌 http://bit.ly/2VS716Q
五)No agreement is better than a bad agreement
http://bit.ly/2YhLmGS
四)沒有中港區隔下的美港關係
http://bit.ly/2LBdHGP
三)讓惡法多睡一會
http://bit.ly/2Jf8Lpc
二)《逃犯條例》修訂「殺到埋身」
http://bit.ly/2H9WYGi
一)立會反擊戰:林鄭的謊言
http://bit.ly/2Jb6sDq
───────
█ 解密過去🔓重掌未來 █
💰捐款支持:http://bit.ly/2IVW56L
📖研究成果:https://medium.com/@decodinghkshistory
🗂計劃詳情:https://researchforfuture.hk
📱instagram:https://www.instagram.com/decodinghkshistory
📧聯絡 #香港前途研究計劃: m.me/decodinghkhistory