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 Woodcock
In 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 court's 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 violence
At 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 people's 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 society's problems
From a court's 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. 2019's anti-revision movement is indeed a continuation of 2014's 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 persistence
As 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 Defendant
Wong Ho Ming
19 August 2021
同時也有1部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過88的網紅May May Beby,也在其Youtube影片中提到,懒惰用太多产品这个产品就是合你!!! 好开心 好兴奋啊??? 全新?Timewise Miracle Set 3D ?提供多重抗氧化功效(DEFEND) ?延缓肌肤提早老化(DELAY)?改善明显多种肌肤老化痕迹(DELIVERY) 想要体验效果,欢迎您留言囖! Lazy to use too m...
「result用法」的推薦目錄:
- 關於result用法 在 黃浩銘 Raphael Wong Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於result用法 在 The News Lens 關鍵評論網 Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於result用法 在 Goodbye HK, Hello UK Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於result用法 在 May May Beby Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於result用法 在 Re: [文法] as a result of - 看板Eng-Class - 批踢踢實業坊 的評價
- 關於result用法 在 result 1.名詞:結果a.the result of the... - Oneyearenglish26 的評價
- 關於result用法 在 Result 与可恢复的错误- Rust 程序设计语言简体中文版 的評價
- 關於result用法 在 【SwiftUI】超简单的Result用法,实现优雅的接口设计 - YouTube 的評價
- 關於result用法 在 axios/axios: Promise based HTTP client for the browser and ... 的評價
result用法 在 The News Lens 關鍵評論網 Facebook 的最佳解答
【#實用英文「as a result」常被使用在論文中,但卻常用得「不標準」】
「請問在研究論文中應該如何使用「as a result」一詞?我對此感到很困惑,因為它在研究寫作中似乎有兩個含意。」──準備回覆審閱者的教授作者
「As a result」是經常用來表示因果關係的片語。在編輯許多論文的過程中,我經常遇到「as a result」的非標準使用法,以下是一個例子:
#論文 #學術論文 #學術英文 華樂絲學術英文論文編修與論文翻譯
result用法 在 Goodbye HK, Hello UK Facebook 的精選貼文
"The fundamental question is, are we going to follow the law?"
「拗咩吖,大家仲信唔信法律制度先?」
繼上次問到Twitter老細口啞之後,美國參議員Ted Cruz接受《Fox News》Sean Hannity訪問,評論大選兩邊嘅爭拗同輿論偏頗嘅情況,再提出一個跨黨派政見立場,值得所有人反思嘅問題,到底大家仲信唔信法律制度先?還是靠响social media打嘴炮或者記者講就得㗎?
"The fundamental question is, are we going to follow the law?"
"The way the system works is, you follow the law...You know, one of the frustrating things as a citizen, you see all these tweets going back and forth, you see allegations of this happened, that happened. It's hard to know, it's hard for anyone to know, all right, is this true, what's true?"
(行之有效嘅制度就係法律制度,作為一個國民,最失望就係睇見啲Tweets你來我往,呢個話見到乜乜,嗰個就講物物,根本無人知,亦唔會知真定假,點知咩真相呀?)
"The only way to know is, we have a legal process -- we have state courts, we have federal courts that can hear legal claims."
(要知道真相嘅唯一方法,就係經過法律程序,我地有各級法院去審理呢啲法律上嘅指控。)
"And right now, it is incumbent on the Trump Campaign's lawyers to go in and prove their case in court -- to lay out evidence -- to lay out evidence of illegally cast votes, lay out evidence of what was done right and what was done wrong. And when the process is over, we're going to know the result..."
(去到呢一步,在任總統嘅律師團咪要去法庭去闡述自己嘅理據囉,用證據解釋咩做啱或者乜嘢做錯。當個法律程序完成,大家咪知道結果囉,拗咩呢?)
"Now, the fact that you or I might say that or someone might tweet that -- that's not conclusive evidence. That needs to be determined in a court of law."
(依家我可以响Twitter講呢樣,佢又講另一樣,呢啲唔係可信嘅證據黎㗎,可信與否係要靠法庭決定嘅。)
"It's amazing that reporters are running around screaming, no, no, no, we can't resolve any of these legal matters."
(最「奇妙」就係啲記者四周圍同人講「No, no, no,呢啲問題係唔可以用法律解決㗎」)
其實Ted Cruz提出呢個概念,去到呢刻到底仲有幾多人明白呢?還是為咗個人政見、立場或者喜惡,而忘記咗?
美國國內係咁,國外就更加...
#選皇帝
Photo Source:FoxNews
訪問原片:
https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/1326264919529025538?s=20
result用法 在 May May Beby Youtube 的精選貼文
懒惰用太多产品这个产品就是合你!!!
好开心 好兴奋啊???
全新?Timewise Miracle Set 3D
?提供多重抗氧化功效(DEFEND)
?延缓肌肤提早老化(DELAY)?改善明显多种肌肤老化痕迹(DELIVERY)
想要体验效果,欢迎您留言囖!
Lazy to use too many products? This is the right set for you!!!
New Timewise miracle set 3D is the new revolutionary formula to help you fight against the harmful effect of environmental factors to your skin
3D becoz it:
? DEFENDS your skin against free radicals
? DELAYS pre-mature aging
? DELIVERS result in as early as 4 weeks!
♥️♥️ Your favorite 3 in 1 cleanser now becomes 4 in 1 cleanser! With added brightening effect?
♥️♥️ Your favorite Age fightening moisturizer now becomes Age minimizer with Spf 30 Broad spectrum!?
Complete set with night cream and eye cream!
#marykay #timewise #miracleset3d
![post-title](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/fSn85z0TtMA/hqdefault.jpg)
result用法 在 result 1.名詞:結果a.the result of the... - Oneyearenglish26 的推薦與評價
不可用被動(無be + p.p. 的用法) 2.result in /result from :用在原因與結果, 只用在壞事(壞原因,壞結果) (酒醉開車:壞原因)(車禍:壞結果) ... <看更多>
result用法 在 Result 与可恢复的错误- Rust 程序设计语言简体中文版 的推薦與評價
这就告诉我们了 File::open 函数的返回值类型是 Result<T, E> 。这里泛型参数 T 放入了成功值的类型 std::fs::File ,它是一个文件句柄。 E ... ... <看更多>
result用法 在 Re: [文法] as a result of - 看板Eng-Class - 批踢踢實業坊 的推薦與評價
※ 引述《auxmathew (我要時間溜直排輪啦~!!!)》之銘言:
: : 經過「鬼媽 on the go」的解說員Liz的說明,as a result of 的用法在我的理解裡
: : 變成好像是一種倒裝句的感覺,不過我這裡的「倒裝句」和一般英語教學裡提到的倒
: : 裝句應該不是相同的東西。
: As a result of 的用法 就跟 because of 一樣
: she was late as a result of the snow = she was late because of the rain
: if i were you => were I you. 最常見的倒裝句 省略 if , were 前置
: : 言歸正傳,舉例來說:she marryed when met her Mr. Right three years later.
: was married /she\
: : 這個句子若改成as a result of 的「倒裝」用法,就會變成:
: : As a result of met her Mr. Right for three years, they marryed.
: meeting were married
: : 再舉一個:Tom talked with a western beauty on the street because he speaks
: : English well.
: : 的 as a result of 倒裝用法,可以變成:
: : As a result of speak English well, Tom get a chance talking with a western
: /ing\ got
: : beauty on the street.
: : As a result of learn the usage of "as a result of", Gerald notices that he
: /ing\
: : know nothing about hyperbaton or anastrophe.
: /s\
: 簡單來說 你的 as a result of + 名詞 or V ing
: 放在句子前半 or 後半部 都不算是到裝句 .... 只是修飾放前面or後面而已
: 動詞/主詞位子改變才算到裝句
: 還有 結婚那個句子造得怪怪的.....
對了,昨天Liz也有提到because 和after,就是用有because 和after的句子來改成
as a result of 的句子。
不過我沒有注意到ing的規則,等一下再去看一下重播看看。(不知道那集刪掉了沒?)
再來造一個句子,以確定我真的理解到這用法了。
As a result of misunderstanding the usage to a phrase and making a joke, Gerald
learn something from his mistake.
--
必有一得。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 210.64.169.189
... <看更多>