#國際戰線【黃之鋒x鄺頌晴｜投稿《華盛頓郵報》：北京立法宣告「一國兩制」死亡】
Oped of Joshua Wong & Glacier Kwong in Washington Post: This is the final nail in the coffin for Hong Kong’s autonomy (Scroll down for English)
《港版國安法》從醞釀到正式宣佈，至今只是不夠一個星期的時間，形勢相當緊迫與嚴峻，爭取國際盟友反對惡法已是爭分奪秒的事情。當路透社報道白宮消息人士表明考慮制裁，當下國際戰線手足必然會推波助瀾，我亦繼昨晚在英國《獨立報》發表文章後，與鄺頌晴在《華盛頓郵報》發表文章，爭取西方政界關注，切實執行對香港官員制裁。
同時，有幾句說話想講。
就係想多謝俾我拖咗落水一齊寫文夾專欄嘅鄺頌晴，要知道自從國安法宣佈左之後，呢個唔知有冇追溯期嘅惡法，根本就能夠隨時以言入罪，分分鐘呢篇外媒投稿文章，都能夠成為所謂叛國或者顛覆國家嘅證據。
無錯，國際戰線嘅成本係提高左唔少，但家陣香港都去到存亡號召嘅境地，別無他選都只能夠頂硬上。所以，無論有無同我合作，取態定位一唔一樣，甚至我認唔認識都好，依家仲會開樣開名，所謂「喺枱面上」嘅國際戰線手足，希望大家都可以俾多啲鼓勵佢哋每一位。
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/24/this-is-final-nail-coffin-hong-kongs-autonomy/
————————————————
中國全國人民代表大會（全國人大）公布了一份與香港《國安法》相關的決定草案，聲稱有關草案可以「建立健全的法律制度和執行機制」，以及「維護香港特別行政區的國家安全」。一旦通過，此決定草案將授權全國人大常委會，在完全繞過香港本地立法程序的情況下，直接在香港實施惡法。字面上，《國安法》的目的是禁止任何分裂國家丶顛覆國家政權丶恐怖活動以及境外勢力干預香港事務的活動。然而，此舉實為香港本已千瘡百孔丶極度脆弱的「高度自治」以及公民自由再添上致命的一擊。
2003年，香港政府意圖以本地立法程序，強推與《國安法》性質相近的23條時，遭到廣泛社會強烈反對，因而宣佈撤回方案。在如此具爭議性的議案面前，暴露了香港政府欠缺民主荃礎。十多年後，香港政府及中央政府的正當性在2019年的反修例運動當中，再次面對挑戰。
然而，正當國際社會忙於對抗疫情，北京卻藉此機會對香港的自治作出一連串的打壓。它先是將中聯辦對香港的「監督權」制度化，現在全國人大更是繞過香港立法會的立法程序，將港版《國安法》直接放在《基本法》附件三，稍後由香港政府公布實施。
香港2019年的運動得以持續多時，有賴三條不同的戰線：街頭抗爭丶議會選舉以及國際遊說的工作。北京以「國家安全」為名，引入一系列的法律條文，一方面藉此取得不受制約的權力，任意打壓示威者以及選舉候選人，另一方面則可以隔絕香港與國際社會之間的連結，阻撓外界對香港的支持。
與此同時，北京已經進一步加強在港的政治宣傳工作，不管示威和平與否，多次指是「本土恐怖主義」抬頭。這亦意味著，於接下來的日子，示威者會極易墮入新《國安法》的規管，並且面對更嚴苛的法律制裁。令人更為擔憂的是，這條法案亦表明針對境外勢力「干預香港事務」。這意味著，不論是議員或抗爭者，單單因為曾經參與國際遊說工作，就可能會被剝奪參選的資格，甚至面臨監禁。而國際非政府組織（INGOs）以及其他組織丶團體，他們的員工以及資產均可能遭受法律清算。
在沒有一個妥當、民意基礎的立法程序下，定義含糊的法律用詞像「分裂國家」以及「顛覆國家」極易會被用作打壓、迫害的工具，侵害我們與生俱來的自由和權利，包括言論自由、集會自由以及宗教自由。所有對於中國以及香港政府的批評，甚至只是支持香港運動的聲音，極有可能被視為分裂或顛覆國家的行為，受到法律制裁。這種寒蟬效將會持續發酵，城內將會出現大量的自我審查，而這種審查勢將蔓延至國際社會。
香港的自由─不論是她作為國際金融中心的角色，還是她充滿生命力的公民社會─都關係到國際社會的利益。再者，基本法所承諾的「一國兩制」丶「高度自治」以及普選，本就得到國際法下所簽訂的《中英聯合聲明》認可。是次中央政府自上而下推行的《國安法》已經不只是香港的本地事務，更是對國際社會的威嚇，讓其噤聲。
一直以來，香港是異見者丶思想破格的人以及革新者的容身之所。縱然面對著日益強大的中國，我們堅持發聲，道出真相。在疫症期間，中國已經顯示出它實為流氓政權的真面目。而在過去一年，我們一直站在對抗中國極權的最前線。
我們衷心希望，世界並不會因中國承諾的經濟利益而妥協，犧牲一直所秉持的核心價值——亦即對人權的尊重；不應因疫情所帶來的經濟衰退，而靠攏日益橫蠻的中國威權。經濟貿易應建立於平等和公平的基礎之上，而非透過威脅以及霸凌來達致。我們呼籲美國執行《香港人權民主法》，歐盟通過《全球馬格尼茨基人權問責法》，對中國實施制裁，以及在即將與中國達成的貿易協議內加入與香港人權狀況相關的條款。
我們再一次懇請世界與香港同行。
————————————————
Beijing has just hammered the final nail in the coffin for Hong Kong’s autonomy. The promise of “one country, two systems” is dead.
Last week, the National People’s Congress (NPC) introduced a draft decision that purports to “establish and improve the legal system and enforcement mechanisms” to “safeguard national security” in Hong Kong. Once passed, the decision will empower the NPC’s Standing Committee to entirely bypass the local legislative process in Hong Kong and implement the infamous “national security law” in the city. On paper, this law aims at prohibiting any act of secession, subversion against the central government, terrorism and foreign interference with Hong Kong affairs. It constitutes, however, a devastating blow to Hong Kong’s already fragile autonomy and civil liberties.
Back in 2003, the Hong Kong government’s forceful attempt to pass a similar piece of legislation in the local legislature was met with uproar from civil society and was aborted. The undemocratic nature of the government proved to be its Achilles’ heel.
More than 15 years later, the legitimacy of the local and central governments faced yet another major challenge amid the 2019 anti-extradition bill movement. But now, Beijing has taken advantage of the global covid-19 pandemic and initiated a series of assaults against Hong Kong’s autonomy while the international community has its hands tied by the virus. It first attempted to institutionalize the “supervisory power” of China’s Liaison Office in the city. The NPC is now further attacking “one country, two systems” by circumventing Hong Kong’s Legislative Council: It legislates by way of inserting the national security law directly to the Annex III of the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s constitution, which will later simply be promulgated by the Hong Kong government.
Three elements helped sustain the 2019 movement: street protests, local electoral institutions and international advocacy efforts. By introducing a series of legal instruments in the name of national security, Beijing wields massive discretionary power to punish protesters and electoral candidates on the one hand, and to cut off Hong Kong from the international society and its crucial support on the other.
Beijing has stepped up its propaganda efforts in Hong Kong by framing the recent protests, peaceful or otherwise, as terrorism. In the future, under the national security law, protesters might easily be subject to much more draconian legal punishments. Worse still, the law explicitly takes aim at foreign interventions “meddling in Hong Kong affairs.” Not only can activists or legislators who have participated in international advocacy efforts be barred from running in elections or even imprisoned, international nongovernmental organizations and other organizations, including their personnel and assets, can also be subject to legal persecution.
Ultimately, without a proper democratic legislative procedure, vague legal terms such as “secession” and “subversion” easily devolve into repressive tools that intrude on our fundamental freedoms and rights, including freedom of speech, assembly and religion. It is not implausible that any criticism against the Chinese or Hong Kong governments — or even demonstration of support for the Hong Kong movements — will soon be construed as a subversive act, punishable by law. This chilling effect will eventually snowball: It starts with widespread self-censorship in the city and then spills over its borders into the rest of the world.
The liberty of the city — from its role of international financial hub to the vibrancy of its civil society — has always been important to the interests of the international community. Furthermore, the promises of “one country, two systems,” “high degree of autonomy” and universal suffrage enshrined in the Basic Law are backed by the Sino-British Joint Declaration, which was recognized under international law. Top-down insertion of the national security law goes beyond a local matter in Hong Kong: It is intended to silence the will of the international community.
Historically, Hong Kong has been the safe haven for the dissident, the liberal-minded and the nonconformist; we speak truth to an increasingly powerful China. Amid the virus, China has revealed its true colors as a rogue state. And in the past year, we have been standing at the forefront against China’s encroaching authoritarianism.
We sincerely hope that the international community will not give in to the economic benefits China has to offer and sacrifice respect for human rights. The economic recession brought by the virus ought not to be resolved through succumbing to China’s encroaching authoritarianism; trade happens on equal and fair terms but not threatening and bullying. We urge the U.S. government to execute the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act, impose sanctions on China and include human rights terms in relation to Hong Kong into trade treaties they are about to conclude with China.
We ask you, once again, to stand with Hong Kong.
another name for joshua 在 Why does Moses change Hosea's name to Joshua? 的推薦與評價
Numbers 13:16 says that "Moses changed the name of Hosea son of Nun to Joshua." What is the significance of this name change? What are the ... ... <看更多>