Question 1

from time to time法律Eric's English Lounge 在Facebook 的評價

Accepted Answer

翻轉視界 18 Changing PerspectiveTheres not just one road to the destination, but many roads. You just need to take the little step that’s right in front of you, and then the next one, and a few years down the track, they will seem like massive achievements.通往目的地的路不止一條，有很多路可走。你只需要邁出眼前這一小步，然後再邁出下一步，幾年下來，將會成為巨大成就。文章來自於New Humans of Australia (有取得授權)★★★★★★★★★★★★I didn’t meet my father until I was 6 years old. My parents had a comfortable, middle-class life in Shanghai, or as close as you could get under communism. But they always wanted to live overseas, and just before I was born, my dad came to Sydney to set things up. I don’t know why, but in the end, my mother and I didn’t join him until I was 6. •a middle-class life 中產階級生活•set things up 打點一切•live overseas 往海外生活•in the end 最後 (表達在經過一段時間或一連串事件之後的結果)直到六歲前我都未曾見過父親。我的雙親在上海過著舒適的中產階級生活，或著說，在共產階級下所能得到的最接近的生活。他們一直響往海外生活，就在我出生前，我父親來到雪梨打點一切。但不知何故，直到六歲那年我與母親才終於與父親團聚。★★★★★★★★★★★★Unfortunately, half a year after we arrived, he left us. That was a huge shock. Our transition had already been quite difficult, as we both didnt speak English. Also, as Shanghai was such a big bustling city, Sydney felt a bit like the countryside, especially on the weekends, as no shops were open back then!•shock 令人震驚的事件（或經歷）；驚愕，震驚 (come as a great shock 讓人倍感震驚)•transition 轉變；過渡•a bustling city 繁華都會不幸的是，就在我跟母親抵達半年後，父親離開了我們。這是個巨大的打擊，因爲我們不會說英文，在適應過渡期本就已過得相當艱辛。此外，不同於上海的繁華都會，雪梨更像鄉下，尤其在週末，那時連商店都不開門。★★★★★★★★★★★★We were very much reliant on my dad, not only financially, but also as a conduit into the wider community. So to have that broken was quite distressing. I remember Mum crying a lot. As we had become socially isolated, we didn’t find out anything about Centrelink, so we survived on her savings for a while, and then got some help from her family back in China. •be reliant on… 依賴...•a conduit into 進入...的渠道•distressing (adj.) 令人苦惱的,令人擔憂的•become socially isolated 變得孤立於社會•survive on her savings 僅靠的她積蓄過日子我們相當依賴我父親，不僅是經濟，他也是我們進入更廣泛社區的渠道。因此，當局面被打破時令人相當痛苦，我還記得母親時常哭泣。由於我們孤立於社會，所以我們並不知道澳洲社會福利聯絡中心 （Centrelink）的任何資訊，僅靠母親的積蓄支撐了一段時間，然後從母親在中國的娘家得到一些幫助。★★★★★★★★★★★★Eventually, Mum moved us down to Melbourne, where we were able to make some new networks and family friendships. But I was bullied a bit at school about things like my food and clothing! Whenever someone bullied me, I would defend myself, but because I didn’t have the language skills to explain to the teacher why, I got in trouble quite a bit. I ended up having to move school 3 times before I came to Balwyn Primary School, which was relatively multicultural. •be able to 能夠•make new networks 建立新的人脈，關係網•be bullied 被霸凌•language skills 語言能力•get in trouble 惹上麻煩•end up  最後處於；最後成爲；以…告終•relatively 相對地•multicultural 多元文化的最後，母親帶著我搬遷到墨爾本，在那我們能夠建立起新的網絡與家庭情誼。然而。我在學校飽受霸凌，例如我的食物及衣物。每當有人霸凌我，我會自我防衛，但我的語言技巧不足以向老師解釋事發原因，因此常常陷入麻煩。後來我不得不再三轉學，直到就讀相對多元文化的博文小學（Balwyn Primary School）。★★★★★★★★★★★★After that, I did alright. Music featured very prominently in my life. I had started learning the violin from the age of 2.5 years old and even with all the troubles that were going on in my life, had somehow still kept up with it. As a result, I got a music scholarship to Trinity Grammar School. But even there I used to get into quite a lot of mischief, and would often skip school to go to the movies.•do alight 過得不錯，做的不錯•feature (v.) 以…為特色；給…以顯著的地位•prominently 重要地；著名地；突出地，顯眼地之後，我便過得不錯。音樂在我生活中佔有重要的一席之地，我從兩歲半開始學習小提琴，儘管生活中事事不如意，我依然堅持不輟。因此，我獲得三一文法學校（ Trinity Grammar School）的音樂獎學金。但即使在那，我也常惡作劇、逃學看電影。★★★★★★★★★★★★By the end of year 11, I was told I would have to either repeat the year, or consider going to another school, which was quite humiliating for my mum. I decided to move school and surprisingly, I ended up doing quite well in year 12! As a result, I ended up getting into a double degree in Law and Music at Monash. •repeat the year 留級 ; 重唸一年•humiliating 令人感到恥辱的，丟臉的11年級結束時，我被告知要麽被留級，要麼考慮轉學，這對我母親來說相當丟人。我決定轉學，而令人驚訝的是，我在12年級的時候表現優異，最後錄取蒙納士大學法律與音樂雙學位。★★★★★★★★★★★★When I started, my first thought was that I didn’t belong because I had done so badly in school up to year 11 and everyone else seemed so smart. But I put my head down, got through it, and ended up getting a job in the legal department of a major manufacturing company, which was a different approach to what most law students do. •do not belong 不屬於這•put my head down 埋頭苦幹•the legal department of ...的法律部門•a different approach 不同途徑 •approach （思考問題的）方式，方法，態度當我開始進入大學，最初的想法是我不屬於這，因為我在11年級前都表現不佳，而這裡的人似乎都聰明絕頂。但我埋頭苦幹，咬牙撐過，最後在一家大型製造公司的法律部門找到工作，這與多數法律系學生的途徑不同。★★★★★★★★★★★★I really enjoyed it. It was hard work, but I learned a lot of foundational business, legal and corporate communication skills. After that I worked in corporate governance in RMIT, then started to moonlight as a lecturer in the Law Faculty. Eventually, they asked me if I wanted to do a PhD and I blindly said yes! I next worked at Swinburne University, and then was head-hunted to lead the corporate legal team at the Commercial Passenger Vehicles Commission.•foundational 基礎的•communication skills 溝通技巧•corporate governance•moonlight (v.) （尤指瞞著僱主）從事第二職業，兼職•headhunt (v.) 物色（人才）； 挖角•legal team 法律團隊我非常喜歡這份工作，這是份辛苦的工作，但我學習了很多基礎商業、法律以及公司溝通技巧。之後我在皇家墨爾本理工大學（ RMIT）從事公司治理工作，並開始兼職擔任法律系講師。後來他們問我是否想要讀博士，我便盲目地答應了。接下來，我在斯威本大學（Swinburne University）工作，再被挖角到商用小客車委員會領導法律團隊。★★★★★★★★★★★★I had a good life, but after a while, I realised I wanted a different kind of job. I could see my seniors were making a lot of money but that their family life was not that good. And looking at my own upbringing, I wanted to be the kind of father who could be present in my own kids’ lives. So I decided on dentistry. It would not only allow me to use the hand skills that I had developed from playing the violin, but also the analytical and reasoning skills that Id developed in law. Plus it would be flexible, and offer me a stable income and the chance to meet different people every day!•upbringing 教養•decide on sth 決定某事或東西•analytical and reasoning skills 分析和推理能力•offer a stable income 提供穩定收入我的生活很不錯，但一段時間後，我意識到自己想要一份不同的工作。我知道前輩們賺了很多錢，但他們的家庭生活並不美滿。看著自己的成長經歷，我想要成為可以在孩子生活中出席的父親，所以我決定改行當牙醫。這項職業能讓我使用從拉小提琴中發展出的手部技巧，也能運用我在法律中發展出的分析與推理技能。此外，這個職業相當靈活，能為我提供穩定收入，並有機會每天與不同的人見面。★★★★★★★★★★★★My now fiancée, who was my girlfriend at the time, was also applying for further study, and coincidentally we both got into university in South Australia, so we moved to Adelaide together a few years ago.•fiancée 未婚妻•at the time 當時•apply for 申請•further study 繼續教育，進修；進一步研究；深造•coincidentally 碰巧地；巧合地我的未婚妻，當時的女友，也申請繼續深造，巧的是我們都考上南澳大學（University of South Australia)，所以幾年前一起搬到阿得雷德（ Adelaide）。★★★★★★★★★★★★I was lucky to get a university job at Flinders University. Initially, I started out as a casual lecturer in the law school, but I’ve since transitioned into teaching health law and research, and I’m currently writing a few books on the intersection between law and medicine. And also, obviously, trying to finish my dentistry degree! •start out as… 起初擔任...•transition into… 轉變到...我很幸運的在福林德斯大學（Flinders University）找到工作，起初我在法學院擔任臨時講師，但我後來轉換到醫事法教學及研究。目前我正撰寫幾本關於法律與醫學相接的書籍，並努力完成我的牙醫學位。★★★★★★★★★★★★Mum eventually retrained as a Chinese high school teacher, and she’s still teaching to this day. Like most first generation migrants, she struggled quite a lot, and invested heavily in my success. After we’re married, my fiancée and I are planning to have children, and I’m sure they will have it much easier than I did. •retrain 重新培養；再培訓；再訓練•to this day 至今•first generation migrants 第一代移民•struggle a lot 掙扎奮鬥許久•have it much easier 過的比較輕鬆我的母親最終重新接受培訓，成為一名中文高中老師並執教至今。如同大多數第一代移民，她掙扎奮鬥許久，並為我的成功投資甚多。我與未婚妻打算婚後生孩子，我確信孩子會過的比我輕鬆得多。★★★★★★★★★★★★Still, a lot of the failures that I’ve had in my life have really informed a lot of my successes. Looking back, I wouldnt really want to change that to have a smoother life. •inform [正式] 影響某人的態度或意見 https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/inform•have a smoother life 有一個更順遂的人生我的生活中的種種失敗確實為我的成功提供借鑑。回首過去，我不會想要改變那些坎坷經歷去擁有一個更順遂的人生。★★★★★★★★★★★★Over the years, Ive learned that perseverance is very important. I hope that through telling my story, I can be an example to others who might be in a similar position as I was: to show that theres not just one road to the destination, but many roads. You just need to take the little step that’s right in front of you, and then the next one, and a few years down the track, they will seem like massive achievements.•over the years 多年來•perseverance 不屈不撓，堅持不懈•be an example 成為榜樣•be in a similar position 處於相似的處境•down the road/line/track 將來(的路)多年來，我學到堅持不懈是至關重要的。我希望透過講述自己的故事，能成為其他可能與我有相似處境的人的榜樣：向他們展示通往目的地的路不止一條，有很多路可走。你只需要邁出眼前這一小步，然後再邁出下一步，幾年下來，將會成為巨大成就。有興趣的同學可以支持New Humans of Australia www.patreon.com/newhumansofaustraliaPhotographer: Paul Heinrich instagram.com/paulfheinrich文章與圖片出處: https://bit.ly/2XJsciq★★★★★★★★★★★★翻轉視界: http://bit.ly/3fPvKUs 批判性思考問題大全: http://bit.ly/34rdtJ7

Question 2

from time to time法律黃浩銘 Raphael Wong 在Facebook 的評價

Accepted Answer

毋忘五大訴求　公民抗命有理—10‧20九龍遊行陳情書（案件編號：DCCC 535/2020）——————————————————「毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中」撐阿銘，即訂閱Patreon：patreon.com/raphaelwong—————————————————胡法官雅文閣下：　　2012年，我第一次站在法庭上承認違反「公安惡法」，述說對普選的盼望，批評公安惡法不義，並因公民抗命的緣故，甘心樂意接受刑罰。當年我說，如果小圈子選舉沒有被廢除，惡法沒有消失，我依然會一如故我，公民抗命，並且我相信將會有更多學生和市民加入這個行列。想不到時至今日，普選仍然遙遙無期，我亦再次被帶到法庭接受審判，但只是短短７年，已經有數十萬計的群眾公民抗命，反對暴政。今日，我承認違反「未經批准的政府」所訂立「未經批准的惡法」之下的「未經批准集結」罪，我不打算尋求法庭的憐憫，但請容許我佔用法庭些微時間陳情，讓法庭在判刑前有全面考慮。暴力之濫觴　　在整個反修例運動如火如荼之際，我正承擔另一宗公民抗命案件的刑責。雖然身在獄中，但仍然心繫手足。我在獄中電視機前見證6月9日、6月16日及8月18日三次百萬港人大遊行，幾多熱愛和平的港人冒天雨冒彈雨走上街頭，抗議不義惡法，今日關於10月20日的案件，亦是如此。可能有人會問，政府已在6月暫緩修例，更在9月正式撤回修例，我等仍然繼續示威，豈非無理取鬧？我相信法官閣下肯定聽過「遲來的正義並非正義」（Justice delayed is justice denied）這句格言。當過百萬群眾走上街頭，和平表達不滿的時候，林鄭政府沒有理睬，反而獨行獨斷，粗暴踐踏港人的意願，結果製造出後來連綿不絕的爭拗，甚至你死我活的對抗。經歷眾多衝突痛苦之後，所謂暫緩撤回，已經微不足道，我們只是更加清楚：沒有民主，就連基本人權都不會擁有！　　在本案之中，雖然我們都沒有鼓動或作出暴力行為，但根據早前8‧18及10‧1兩宗案件，相信在控方及法庭眼中，案發當日的暴力事件仍然可以算在我們頭上，如此，我有必要問：如果香港有一個公平正義的普及選舉，人民可以在立法會直接否決他們不認可的法律，試問2019年的暴力衝突可以從何而來呢？如果我們眼見的暴力是如此十惡不赦，那麼我們又如何看待百萬人遊行後仍然堅持推行惡法的制度暴力呢？如果我們不能接受人民暴力反抗，那麼我們是否更加不能對更巨大更壓逼的制度暴力沈默不言？真正且經常發生的暴力，是漠視人民訴求的暴力，是踐踏人民意見的暴力，是剝奪人民表達權利的暴力。真正憎恨暴力，痛恨暴力的人，不可能一方面指摘暴力反抗，又容忍制度暴力。如果我需要承擔和平遊行引發出來的暴力事件的刑責，那麼誰應該承擔施政失敗所引發出來的社會騷亂的罪責呢？社會之病根　　對於法庭而言，可能2019年所發生的事情只是一場社會騷亂，務必追究違法者個人責任。然而，治亂治其本源，醫病醫其病根，我雖然公民抗命，刻意違法，控方把我帶上法庭，但我卻不應被理解為一個「犯罪個體」。2019年所發生的事情，並不是我一個人或我們這幾位被告可以促成，社會問題的癥結不是「犯罪份子」本身，而是「犯罪原因」。我明白「治亂世用重典」的道理，但如果「殺雞儆猴」是解決方法，就不會在2016年發生旺角騷亂及2017年上訴庭對示威者施以重刑後，2019年仍然會爆發出更大規模的暴力反抗。如果不希望社會動亂，就必須正本清源，逐步落實「五大訴求」，從根本上改革，挽回民心。2019年反修例運動，其實只是2014年雨傘運動的延續而已，縱使法庭可能認為兩個運動皆是「一股歪風」所引起，但我必須澄清，兩個運動的核心就是追求民主普選，人民當家作主。在2019年11月24日區議會選舉這個最類近全民普選的選舉中，接近300萬人投票，民主派大勝，奪得17個區議會主導權，這就是整個反修例運動的民意，民意就是反對政府決策，反對制度暴力，反對推行惡法，不容爭辯，不辯自明。我們作為礦場裡的金絲雀，多次提醒政府撤回修法，並從根本上改革制度，而在10月20日的九龍遊行當然是反映民意的平台契機。如今，法庭對我們施加重刑，其實只不過是懲罰民意，將金絲雀困在鳥籠之內，甚至扼殺於鼓掌之中，窒礙表達自由。堅持之重要　　大運動過後的大鎮壓，使我們失去《蘋果日報》，失去教協，失去民陣，不少民主派領袖以及曾為運動付出的手足戰友都囚於獄中，不少曾經熱情投入運動的朋友亦因《國安法》的威脅轉為低調，新聞自由示威自由日漸萎縮，公民社會受到沈重打擊，我亦失去不少摯友，有感傷孤獨的時候，但我仍然相信，2019年香港人的信念，以及所展現人類的光輝持久未變。我不會忘記百萬人民冒雨捱熱抗拒暴政，抵制惡法，展現我們眾志成城；我不會忘記人潮紅海，讓道救護車，展現我們文明精神；我不會忘記年青志士直接行動反對苛政，捨身成仁，展現我們膽色勇氣；我不會忘記銀髮一族走上街頭保護年青人，展現我們彼此關懷；我不會忘記「五大訴求」，不會忘記2019年區議會選舉，展現我們有理有節。　　法官閣下，我對於當日的所作所為，不感羞恥，毫無悔意。我能夠在出獄後與群眾同行一路，與戰友同繫一獄，實是莫大榮幸。若法治失去民主基石，將使法庭無奈地接受專制政權所訂立解釋的法律限制，隨時變成政治工具掃除異見，因此爭取民主普選，建設真正法治，追求公平正義，仍然是我的理想。在這條路上，如有必要，我仍然會公民抗命，正如終審法院海外非常任法官賀輔明（Lord Hoffmann）所言，發自良知的公民抗命有悠久及光榮的傳統，歷史將證明我們是正確的。我期望，曾與我一起遊行抗命的手足戰友要堅持信念，在艱難歲月裡毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中。　　最後，如9年前一樣，我想借用美國民權領袖馬丁路德金牧師的一番話對我們的反對者說：「我們將以自己忍受苦難的能力，來較量你們製造苦難的能力。我們將用我們靈魂的力量，來抵禦你們物質的暴力。對我們做你們想做的事吧，我們仍然愛你們。我們不能憑良心服從你們不公正的法律，因為拒惡與為善一樣是道德責任。將我們送入監獄吧，我們仍然愛你們。」（We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you.）　　願慈愛的主耶穌賜我們平安，與我和我一家同在，與法官閣下同在，與香港人同在。沒有暴徒，只有暴政；五大訴求，缺一不可！願榮耀歸上帝，榮光歸人民！第五被告黃浩銘二零二一年八月十九日Lest we forget the five demands: civil disobedience is morally justified- Statement on 10‧20 Kowloon Rally(Case No.: DCCC 535/2020)Your Honour Judge WoodcockIn 2012, I stood before the court and admitted to violating the Public Security Evil Law. I expressed my hope for universal suffrage, criticized the evil law as unjust, and willingly accepted the penalty for civil disobedience. Back then, I said that if the small-circle election had not been abolished and the draconian law had not disappeared, I would still be as determined as I was, and I believe that more students and citizens would join this movement. Today, universal suffrage is still a long way off, and I have been brought before the court again for trial. But in just seven years, hundreds of thousands of people have already risen up in civil disobedience against tyranny. Today, I plead guilty to unauthorised assembly under an unapproved evil law enacted by an unauthorised government. I do not intend to seek the courts mercy, but please allow me to take up a little time in court to present my case so that the court can consider all aspects before sentencing me.The roots of violenceAt the time when the whole anti-extradition law movement was in full-swing, I was taking responsibility for another civil disobedience case. Although I was in prison, my heart was still with the people. I witnessed the three million-person rallies on 9 June, 16 June and 18 August on television in prison, when many peace-loving people took to the streets despite the rain and bullets, to protest against unjust laws. Some people may ask, The Government has already suspended the legislative amendments in June and formally withdrew the bill in September, but we are still demonstrating, are we not being unreasonable? I am sure your Honour has heard of the adage Justice delayed is justice denied. When more than a million people took to the streets to express their discontent peacefully, the Lam administration ignored them and instead acted arbitrarily, brutally trampling on the wishes of the people of Hong Kong, resulting in endless arguments and even confrontations. After so many conflicts and painful experiences, the so-called moratorium is no longer meaningful. We only know better: without democracy, we cannot even have basic human rights!In this case, although we did not instigate or commit acts of violence, I believe that in the eyes of the prosecution and the court, the violence on the day of the incident can still be counted against us, based on the August 18 and October 1 case. And now I must ask - If Hong Kong had a fair and just universal election, and the public could directly veto laws they did not approve of at the Legislative Council, then how could the violent clashes of 2019 have come about? If the violence we see is so heinous, how do we feel about the institutional violence that insists on the imposition of draconian laws even after millions of people have taken to the streets? If we cannot accept violent rebellion, how can we remain silent in the face of even greater and more oppressive institutional violence? The true and frequent violence is the kind of violence that ignores peoples demands, that tramples on their opinions, that deprives them of their right to express themselves. People who truly hate violence and abhor it cannot accuse violent resistance on the one hand and tolerate institutional violence on the other. If I have to bear the criminal responsibility for the violence caused by the peaceful demonstration, then who should bear the criminal responsibility for the social unrest caused by failed administration?The roots of societys problemsFrom a courts point of view, it may be that what happened in 2019 was just a series of social unrest, and that those who broke the law must be held personally accountable. What happened in 2019 was not something that I alone or the defendants could have made possible, and the crux of the social problem was not the criminals but the causes of crime. I understand the concept of  applying severe punishment to a troubled world, but if decimation was really the solution, there would not have been more violent rebellions in 2019 after the Mongkok riot in 2016 and the heavy sentences handed down to protesters by the Court of Appeal in 2017.If we do not want social unrest, we must get to the root of the problem and implement the five demands step by step, so as to achieve fundamental reforms and win back the hearts of the people. 2019s anti-revision movement is indeed a continuation of 2014s Umbrella Movement, and even though the court may think that both movements are caused by a perverse wind, I must clarify that the core of both movements is the pursuit of democracy and universal suffrage, and the people being the masters of their own house. In the District Council election on 24 November 2019, which is the closest thing to universal suffrage, nearly 3 million people voted, and the democratic camp won a huge victory, winning majority in 17 District Councils. As canaries in the monetary coal mine, we have repeatedly reminded the government to withdraw the extradition bill and fundamentally reform the system, and the march in Kowloon on 20 October was certainly an opportunity to reflect public opinion. Now, by imposing heavy penalties on us, the court is only punishing public opinion, trapping the canaries in a birdcage, or even stifling them in the palm of their hands, suffocating the freedom of expression.The importance of persistenceAs a result of the crackdown after the mass movement, we lost Apple Daily, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers Union, and the Civil Human Rights Front. Many of our democratic leaders and comrades who had contributed to the movement were imprisoned, and many of our friends who had been passionately involved in the movement had been forced to lay low under the threat of the National Security Law. I still believe that the faith of Hong Kong people and the glory of humanity seen in 2019 will remain unchanged. I will never forget the millions of people who braved the rain and the heat to resist tyranny and evil laws, demonstrating our unity of purpose; I will never forget the crowds of people who gave way to ambulances, demonstrating our civility; I will never forget the young people who sacrificed their lives, demonstrating our courage and bravery; I will never forget the silver-haired who took to the streets to protect the youth, demonstrating our care for each other; I will never forget the five demands and the 2019 District Council election, demonstrating our rationality and decency.Your Honour, I have nothing to be ashamed of and no remorse for what I did on that day. It is my great honour to be in prison with my comrades and to be able to walk with the public after my release. If the rule of law were to lose its democratic foundation, the courts would have no choice but to accept the legal restrictions set by the autocratic regime and become a political tool to eliminate dissent at any time. As Lord Hoffmann, a non-permanent overseas judge of the Court of Final Appeal, said, civil disobedience from the conscience has a long and honourable tradition, and history will prove us right. I hope that my comrades in arms who walked with me in protests will keep their faith and live in love and truth in the midst of this difficult time.Finally, as I did nine years ago, I would like to say something to those who oppose us, borrowing the words of American civil rights leader Reverend Martin Luther King: We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you.Peace be with me and my family, with Your Honour, and with the people of Hong Kong. There are no thugs, only tyranny; five demands, not one less! To god be the glory and to people be the glory!The Fifth DefendantWong Ho Ming19 August 2021

Question 3

from time to time法律譚蕙芸 在Facebook 的評價

Accepted Answer

［沒有誰比誰高貴］（六之五）反修例運動此前多場審訊，不論是襲警、藏武器、暴動案，在法庭裡的檢視方法，採取視覺較微觀。示威者在這條街被捕，隔一條街發生的事，不會視為相關。時間上檢視也收得狹窄，例如7.21元朗襲擊，或831太子站事件，示威者受事件影響之後上街，法庭不會視為有參考價值（relevant）. 然而國安法第一審，唐英傑開電單車涉衝向警察防線，車上插了「光復香港。時代革命」旗幟，案件搬到法庭，被提升到「恐怖活動」「煽動他人分裂國家」層次。法庭對刑事案件審訊，多檢視可觸摸之物，如翻看閉路電視、檢視直播片段、化驗被告背包或手袋的物件。但驗視一句話的意義，用甚麼方法，拉闊到歷史何年何月，翻查幾多本字典，還是要揭開人腦看看人的思想？早幾天，辯方專家證人，港大學者李詠怡當被控方逼問舉殖民旗的人心裡想甚麼，梁天琦設計口號的心底意思。Eliza一度在庭上表示：「我沒法子有讀心術　（I am not a mindreader）.」如何去讀一場社會運動的集體心理？社會學家，明顯和法律專家有不同看法。這天，彭寶琴法官問及Francis，他如何理解「反修例運動的時間線(timeline)」。作為專研社運的學者，Francis認為運動由2019年6月9日開始，延續至大約2020年中，但難說某一日正式結束。彭官反問：「逃犯條例不是撤回了嗎？在2019年9月條例撤回後，李教授你仍然覺得運動繼續下去？」Francis說是。彭官亦問Francis，「你在問卷中問示威者，那一個口號有代表性，但每一個集會不是有主辦單位嗎？大會不是有他們的主題？」（亦即民間所謂的大台）Francis回應道，每次遊行雖有個別主題，但整場大型反修例運動不只是個別遊行。「例如人們最初對『齊上齊落』口號感到有共鳴，因為此口號表達了整場運動裡，示威者感到的團結精神和聯繫感(togetherness)。很多時候，口號不是直接與政策訴求有關，而是表達示威者的情感和感受。」這天，辯方專家證人，中大新傳學院教授李立峯Francis進入第二天作供。高個子的他，頭髮長及頸，穿了淺灰色西裝外套，外套布料質地有反光效果，西裝上的縐紋特別顯眼。他出現在證人枱時，拿着橙色的布袋，把厚厚的文件塞在布袋內，擱在證人枱。Francis喜歡把手踭擱在枱上，竪起前臂，長長的手指揮舞着，談起他熱愛的社科方法論，語速越說越快，微微地左右搖動帶輪辦公室椅子。法官不只一次請他說慢一點。有些時候，三位法官們發問的問題，比雙方大狀們更多。Francis說，曾向全香港市民抽樣撥打電話作民意調查。為了要有隨機性，撥打住戶家居電話時，會向聽電話的人問，若家居住戶多於一人，那一位同住者的生日日期較接近，則邀請該人來回答民調。唯一的男法官陳嘉信，手指之間常夾着筆，雙眉上下舞動，立即發問：「為何打電話去家居要這樣問，而手機則不用問？」Francis解答道：「在外國，曾有研究發現，在家庭中負責接電話的人，永遠都是家庭主婦。」法官杜麗冰聽到後，臉上綻放出會心微笑，更向陳官互相交換笑容。Francis續說：「又或者是年輕人搶着電話聽，這樣，民調做出來就會有偏差。」另一個社會學方法論的提問，也是由陳嘉信法官追問出來的。Francis團隊亦曾於廿多場遊行或集會活動中做現場調查。調查員會被分派在集會或遊行現場，邀請參加者填問卷。但隨着運動變得更流水式，出現更多變數，甚至出現衝突。為了保護調查員安全，例如7.27元朗遊行，他們會派出少量資深調查員到現場，派發含有QR Code的單張，示威者可以事後上網填寫。無論是代表控方的周天行檢控專員，抑或法官都問Francis，讓人拿單張回去跟QR Code填問卷，怎樣肯定填的人真是去過現場？陳嘉信法官問：「你說，填問卷的人很熱心，你怎知他們會不會『熱心』過頭，上網虛構答案？」他雙手在空中比劃着括號，把「熱心」二字強調。Francis說，他們巧妙地在網上問卷中加入了一條題目：「這天在那一個示威地點加入隊伍」，亦有一個選項是：「我今天沒有參加遊行」。填表者並不知道，研究員會剔走沒參加遊行的人的意見。「他們填的時候，不知道這條題目若答了，其實篩走了自己，最終我們便可以只分析參加過示威的人的數據。」三法官聽罷，明白學者一早想到這些漏洞，點頭表示明白。法庭裡，尋找「光時」意義之旅，控辯雙方均花心力指斥對方研究方法有漏洞。代表律政司的署理刑事檢控專員周天行，嘗試從Francis的研究裡，找尋不足之處。Francis和團隊以5種研究方法：全港性電話民意調查、示威現場問卷調查、焦點小組、連登討論區大數據分析、公共討論分析（時評人在傳媒的言論），多管齊下來理解社會運動中口號的意義。周專員指，調查大部分於2020年初之前進行，而本案發生的日子（2020年7月1日）之前一段時間，即2020年2月至7月，Francis沒有相關研究。周專員問：「沒有任何事阻止你進行更多研究吧。」Francis指，當他自己知道要做專家證人時，已是2021年4月底，時光追不回了。「我不能坐時光機回到過去(I cannot travel back in time to do it.) 周專員堅持追問，可以做電話民調呀。此時陳嘉信法官插嘴表達其看法：「即係你叫李教授在2021年問番啲人9個月前在想甚麼?」Francis望着陳官說：「你說的我認同，即使可以問，搜集回來的數據也不會可信。問人今日在想甚麼會較可信，你問人一年前想甚麼，可信性甚低。」周專員轉以「以子之矛」嘗試再去進攻。「你曾說過口號的意義會隨時間改變，你在案發前一段相關時間，無研究喎。」Francis再解釋，除非遇到重大事件，口號的意思隨時間改變，基本上是以年計，或以十年計，「口號意義改變，並非分分秒秒在變動」。Francis在庭上首次披露，他團隊進行的「連登討論區」大數據研究，份量之浩瀚，他和團隊從連登「時事台」從2019年6月到8月21日的討論帖子及回應留言，涉及2千5百萬個，電腦檔案足有38GB。周專員從枱底拿出幾疊白紙，原來他的團隊從連登討論區，人手萃取了一些帖文，叫Francis即場示範如何做Coding (編碼)工作。西裝骨骨的Francis翻閱着文件，開始說：「呢位網民【四葉妹妹】有提及過「光復香港。時代革命」沒提及「港獨」及「五大訴求」，可算為「1, 1, 0, 0」; 網民【英國男孩】完全沒提，電腦會記為「0, 0, 0, 0」；這位【草尼馬仔】貼了光時旗的照片，不含文字留言，我們技術上沒法認出。但不改變們這個整個研究方法的合理性」。在嚴肅法庭，聽到鬼馬的網名，旁聽者都忍不住笑了出來。控辯雙方過招，誰的「方法和總結」算是合理，光時究竟意義何在，是否違犯國案法？Francis今天較完整披露他的看法。他認為，控方專家劉智鵬教授，以歷史及語言學角度去看「光時」這口號的意思，作出一個聲稱，就是「『光復香港。時代革命』這口號，只有唯一一個解讀，並為所有人共知」，「但我認為劉教授沒有提供充足證據去證明這個聲稱」。Francis解釋，劉教授報告中用了「necessarily」一字，即口號詮釋的唯一可能「必然」是這樣，這是Francis自己認為需要用多種社科方法驗證的假設。口號究竟是由喊的人那端衍生意思，還是從接收者那邊決定意思？陳法官指，他理解控方劉專家報告中指的是，「喊口號的人懷有分裂國家意圖和目的」。但Francis卻說，喊口號基本上是一個「傳播行為」，不只是一個人單方面「個人表達」那麼簡單。一個口號喊出來，是由嗌的人承擔意義發送者責任，還是接收的人也有份貢獻意義？如此哲學性問題，在法庭的空氣裡交鋒。Francis又像在講課一樣，「作為傳播學者，我認為，喊口號是一個溝通行為，不只是一種自我表達。我嗌一個口號，會考慮接收者如何理解。」小個子的法官杜麗冰，左手手指戴了綠寶石戒指，她一邊說話一邊以手部語言輔助她的比喻：「好像我跟一百個人說，我喜歡西瓜，有人會覺得我愛吃紅色的生果，另一個人覺得我愛吃綠色皮的水果。我發送一個訊息，但別人接收不同。」Francis補充：「不止這樣，說話的人會小心用字。例如有一句句子意義明確，另一句句子的意義含糊，如果我要表達自己，減少誤會，我會選較明確的那句。」陳官提出，智力不同的人也會用字不同。Francis反駁：「不只，也看大家出身甚麼背景，像你們法庭背景的人理解『引導性問題』(leading question)和我們社科人便不同，不只是智力差異的問題。」聽到這句話，杜官和陳官都作深思狀。控方曾挑戰，指若文字意義多樣，人們便沒辦法溝通。Francis在此反駁：「劉教授說，人們會跟社會慣例(convention)去用字，但問題是，社會有很多慣例。文字使用很複雜，也有修辭學(rhetoric)作為一種慣例。劉教授把語言意義解得太過死板（too rigid），語言意義多樣，修辭令人們變通調適，否則世界便沒有創意寫作了（creative writing）。」控方周專員指出，劉教授也有其「證據」，就是警方跟據示威錄影片段，數算有多少次出現「光時口號」，而這口號與「顛覆元素」如港獨訴求、暴力行為同時出現。Francis反駁，這數據只在「點算上」可靠，但兩件事同時出現(co-appearance)，並不等於有關。Francis用一個生活化的例子，說明兩種同時出現的東西，無必然關係。「在大學，學生在班房可以自由入座，兩個大學生每次課堂都一起坐，可以解讀為他們是朋友；但在中學，課室座位是被編排的，兩個中學生常並排而坐，只能說他們是一起坐。」然後，Francis就望着控辯雙方大狀的方向：「就像在這個法庭，李先生和周先生也一起坐，要考慮這是個法庭場景。」眾笑。至於示威場景，有其特性，Francis解釋：「好像每年香港七一遊行，於同一個示威裡出現的團體，訴求可以不共容。如性小眾、勞工及外傭團體也會各自有訴求。」即使大型示威有一些共同訴求，各人理解也有差異。Francis指，他有研究2014雨傘運動，其口號為「我要真普選」，「但落實到具體解釋，甚麼是『真』的普選？『真』字既開放又抽象，讓人各自己想象。」文字容易於不同場景被誤解，Francis特別澄清了一個可能的誤會。焦點小組討論的指引中，研究員需要留意討論覆蓋不同範疇。其中一個範圍呈在法庭文件中，寫道：「社會運動意識形態和激進化(social movement ideology and movement radicalization」。Francis特別澄清「激進」二字的在的學術意思：「激進化，在研究社運學術世界裡，意思是與社會常態的距離（deviation from social norm ），涉及更重大改變的意思，並沒有『好與壞』的評價。」「好像反修例運動最初，有人要求『成立獨立調查委員會』，這訴求較溫和，因為過去香港也曾成立過，相比起來，『解散警隊』這口號則較激進」。陳官補充：「即是要求更徹底的社會改變。」陳官亦引述文件中的資料，好奇地向Francis查問：「為何你認為『光復香港。時代革命』比『五大訴求』更激進呢？」Francis解釋：「修辭學上，『革命』比『訴求』所涉及的改變，幅度更大，這是明顯的。」在香港的刑事審訊上，「不爭辯事實、客觀存在」是常用術語，去指控一個人做了一件事，作為刑事案的入罪條件。然而一支旗，一句口號，如何建基於事實，使用這種法律語言，又出現了奇特的交雜和火花：周專員指出，警察報告中點算示威口號出現次數是「客觀、不爭辯的事實」。Francis反駁道：「你們只是提供了口號在示威現場，曾出現過的這個事實。」周進逼：「你們只是倚賴別人的意見。」Francis：「我們紀錄了人們表達意見的這個事實。我們分析的文章、人們論述過這些意見，都是一種『社會現實』（social facts）」周再問：「你是否同意，劉智鵬教授報告裡，他對光時口號的解釋，是對的(correct)？」詮譯變成了對和錯，二元對立，二選一，社科學者抗議了。Francis：「我們的總結是，口號是開放的，抽象的，不只一個解釋，每人有每人的論述。我不會評價一個時評家對口號的解釋，正如我不會評價焦點小組裡一個平凡人的解讀。(I wouldn’t judge)我不會說，這個人的解讀是正確，這只是他自己的說話　(I wouldn’t say if this guy is correct, it is his own articulation)。」周不放棄：「你不會異議，若我說劉智鵬教授的解讀是對的。」Francis斬釘截鐵回應：「我會異議，問題並不在對與錯」。杜麗冰法官嘗試插話，問Francis：「你會否覺得劉教授可以作這樣的解釋，即使你不贊同其解讀？」Francis說：「我個人不會對口號作這樣的詮釋。劉智鵬教授的詮譯，只是『其中一個詮釋』。其解讀的地位沒有特別高，也沒有特別低。相比起某一個時事評論員，或者我們焦點小組的某一個參與者。」周天行在盤問到最後，拋出了這個問題：「我說，我方對口號的理解方法(approach)更可靠。」Francis噗哧笑了，全場亦爆出陣陣笑聲：「哈哈，肯定不是。警察在『點算口號』上或許是可靠，但我挑戰警察報告中『對數據的理解』，當口號與顛覆元素共同於示威場合出現，根本不是支持口號有顛覆意義的證據。我對警察報告是完全不贊同。」此時，周天行專員彎腰，跟坐在他旁的同事耳語了逾三十秒。周專員回過頭，橫空拋出這句話：「我向你指出，你的報告不可靠，不相關。」Francis咬字清晰，語氣肯定回應：「我的報告，既可靠，合乎標準，亦相關。」誰的解讀更有權威？控方專家認為喊口號的人必然意圖顛覆；辯方則指出，口號是開放和曖昩的，任何人的解讀，都沒有比另一個人的解讀更有權威。一支旗，八個字，意義之爭，連繫着多位國安法被告的命運。國安第一被告唐英傑，身型壯碩，年輕的他坐在犯人欄，由幾個懲教署職員押送。唐的學歷不算高，是一位日本餐廳的厨師，然而穿着深色西服的他，還押了一年後，出席他自己的審訊，連日聽學者解讀他舉過的一支旗，都堅持翻閱着厚厚的法律文件，專心地聽着耳機，坐在他旁邊隔了犯人欄的翻譯先生，即時以廣東話傳譯。「Rhetoric….修辭學」英語對話，小聲的廣東話，在法庭後方響起了，兩條聲道有些重疊。幾名穿墨綠色制服的懲教署職員， 和唐一起坐在寬闊的犯人欄內。懲教職員的身體，慢慢挪移越近唐的方向，他們偶爾也竪起耳朵，跟進學者們的辯論進程。連穿着保安制服的叔叔，都聽得懂英語，都留意到辯論擦出火花，露出驚訝的表情。八個字，有罪還是無罪，全城關注。誰的解讀更高貴？時鐘已到下午四時半，明天Francis繼續作供。＊＊＊國安法首審專家證人系列（六之一）：［Regime & Redeem］7月2日控方專家劉智鵬作供https://www.facebook.com/wwviviantam/photos/a.1435553239866430/4210137115741348/國安法首審專家證人系列（六之二）：［Just Do it］7月9日辯方專家李詠怡作供https://www.facebook.com/wwviviantam/photos/a.1435553239866430/4229321820489544/國安法首審專家證人系列（六之三）：［過去與未來］7月12日辯方專家李詠怡作供https://www.facebook.com/wwviviantam/photos/a.1435553239866430/4237523026336090/國安法首審專家證人系列（六之四）：［知行合一］7月13日辯方專家李詠怡及李立峯作供https://www.facebook.com/wwviviantam/photos/a.1435553239866430/4240215429400183/國安法首審專家證人系列（六之五）：［沒有誰比誰高貴］7月14日辯方專家李立峯作供https://www.facebook.com/wwviviantam/photos/a.1435553239866430/4243328702422189/ 國安法首審專家證人系列（六之六）：［選櫻桃的人］7月15日辯方專家李立峯作供https://www.facebook.com/wwviviantam/photos/a.1435553239866430/4245860505502342/（圖為辯方專家證人中大新傳學院教授李立峯離開高等法院）

關於 from time to time法律 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

「from time to time法律」的推薦目錄：

from time to time法律 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的精選貼文

About author

from time to time法律 在 黃浩銘 Raphael Wong Facebook 的最讚貼文

About author

from time to time法律 在 譚蕙芸 Facebook 的最佳解答

About author

from time to time法律 在 Namewee Youtube 的最讚貼文

About author

from time to time法律 在 Namewee Youtube 的最佳貼文

About author

from time to time法律 在 志祺七七 X 圖文不符 Youtube 的最讚貼文

About author

你可能也想看看

搜尋相關連結

關於 from time to time法律，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

from time to time法律在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的精選貼文

from time to time法律在黃浩銘 Raphael Wong Facebook 的最讚貼文

from time to time法律在譚蕙芸 Facebook 的最佳解答

from time to time法律在 Namewee Youtube 的最讚貼文

from time to time法律在 Namewee Youtube 的最佳貼文

from time to time法律在志祺七七 X 圖文不符 Youtube 的最讚貼文