Publications

【聲援良心犯】戴耀廷反擊石永泰!黃瑞紅:爭公義不能用一般犯罪標準

大律師黃瑞紅今日亦有出席遊行。她說是次判刑,大眾關注的是東北案13人、雙學三子既已完成社會服務令但卻被刑期覆核。對大律師公會前主席石永泰今日說三人是「求仁得仁」,她說,法官不應該用一般犯罪的標準,來審判因爭取公義、人權而被檢控的人士。 至於本港法治是否已死?黃瑞紅說,在法例中仍有空間去捍衛市民的基本人權,未來會繼續進行這方面的工作。

法政匯思就「反新界東北」及「926重奪公民廣場」刑期覆核裁決聲明 (Statement in response to recent Court of Appeal sentencing reviews)

於2017年8月15及17日,上訴庭分別就律政司提出「反新界東北」及「926重奪公民廣場」案件的刑期作出覆核,改判「反新界東北」案的13名被告人8至13 個月監禁及「926重奪公民廣場」案的黃之峰、羅冠聰及周永康三人6至8個月監禁,法政匯思對此裁決深感悲痛。(Upon the Secretary for Justice’s applications, the Court of Appeal this week reviewed the sentences for thirteen participants in the anti-northeast New Territories development protests and three prominent student leaders—Joshua Wong, Nathan Law and Alex Chow—involved in the re-taking of the Civic Square. The Court of Appeal overruled the original sentences in both cases and imposed eight to thirteen months of imprisonment on the thirteen protesters and six to eight months of imprisonment on the three student leaders. The Progressive Lawyers Group ("PLG") is deeply aggrieved by these judgments.)

Hong Kong’s government finally managed to put democracy fighter Joshua Wong behind bars

Three years after the 79-day Occupy protests calling for greater democracy in Hong Kong, the young leaders of the movement are going to jail. Joshua Wong, 20, Nathan Law, 24, and Alex Chow, 26, were sentenced to six months, eight months, and seven months, respectively, by a court in Hong Kong today (Aug. 17) for their actions in the 2014 protests, also known as the Umbrella Movement. Wilson Leung, a practicing lawyer in Hong Kong and member of the Progressive Lawyers Group, said that he still believes judges in Hong Kong are independent of the government. “However, we strongly disagree with the government treating political problems as ‘law and order’ problems and focusing on the prosecution of protestors,” he said.

Political Prisoners in Hong Kong

On August 17, a Hong Kong appeals court sentenced student democracy activists Joshua Wong, Alex Chow, and Nathan Law to six to eight months imprisonment. The three had earlier been convicted of crimes related to unlawful assembly during a demonstration in 2014 when they had crossed a police barrier, but the lower court had sentenced them only to community service and a suspended jail sentence, arguing that their breach had been a form of political expression. But even in Hong Kong, a city which has enjoyed political freedoms absent elsewhere in China, it was the preservation of “public order” the court chose to emphasize. “To disrupt public order and public peace in the name of free exercise of powers,” said court Vice President Wally Yeung Chun-kuen, “will cause our society to descend into chaos.” The new sentence, which the three plan to appeal, also carries a five-year prohibition on running for elected office in Hong Kong. Progressive Lawyers Group member Alvin Y.H. Cheung was interviewed by ChinaFile about the jailed activists.

Hong Kong democracy campaigners jailed over anti-China protests

Hong Kong’s democracy movement has suffered the latest setback in what has been a punishing year after three of its most influential young leaders were jailed for their roles in a protest at the start of a 79-day anti-government occupation known as the umbrella movement. “It smacks of political imprisonment, plain and simple,” said Jason Ng, a member of the Progressive Lawyers Group and the author of Umbrellas in Bloom, a book about Hong Kong’s youth protest movement.

Hong Kong student leaders jailed over pro-democracy protest tied to Umbrella Movement

Nearly three years ago, several Hong Kong youth with hopes of greater democracy led a downtown protest that ballooned into thousands and lasted for 79 days. Now, they’re going to jail. “It felt like a punch in the stomach,” said Jason Y. Ng, a lawyer, a member of the Progressive Lawyers Group and personal friend of Wong’s, who has written a book about the Umbrella Movement.

任建峰:這就是「香港共和國」?

【明報文章】兩星期前(8月2日),我提到在今個月會以推理分析來看看港獨的根本不可行,今日的文章是這系列第二篇文章。

香港動物法律講座 (Seminar on Hong Kong Animal Welfare Legislation)

法政匯思的成員會在2017年9月15日與愛護的朋友見面,同大家探討一下香港有關動物法律的問題。(Progressive Lawyers Group members will be speaking at a seminar on Hong Kong animal welfare legislation hosted by Pawsible on 15 September 2017.)

【法政巴絲】不是起不起高鐵的問題

我認,高鐵嘅嘢,我真係識條鐵。 內地官員可以喺香港境內(西九)執行內地法律,點睇都唔符合「全國性法律除列於本法附件三外,不在香港特別行政區實施」(基本法第18條)喎。 政府話,解決辦法好簡單,可以由中央根據基本法第20條,授權香港租西九畀內地嚟用。但係,第20條係話「香港特別行政區可享有全國人民代表大會常務委員會及中央人民政府授予的其他權利」。究竟呢啲字眼,係可以點樣解讀成「中央授予香港政府權利⋯⋯決定基本法有啲條文,有時適用,有時唔適用」?

「寒戰2」電影分享會 (Movie Sharing Session on “Cold War 2”)

近日我們的律師成員Leo Ng出席了由明愛青少年及社區服務舉辦的「寒戰2」小型電影分享會,與青少年分享他對法治的看法。(Our solicitor member Leo Ng attended the “Cold War 2” movie sharing session held by Caritas Youth and Community Service to share his views on the rule of law with young people.)

法政匯思:「你怕就不要坐高鐵!」

林鄭月娥指﹕「如果你咁擔心(被人拉),你咪選擇其他方法去內地囉!」,甚至不到內地 。 問題,出在「你」這個字。特首不是一人一票選出,究竟代表的是小圈子,還是七百萬人,大家心裡明白。有一群香港人擔心「一地兩檢」的安排,那就是「你」的問題,不是「我」的問題。而這個「你」,是多是少,反正都是「你」的問題。明明連反對的權利都沒有,甚至連被諮詢的機會都被消失,從2009年提出建議,事隔8年,到2017年,一下子就提出引進內地法律的「一地兩檢」方案,而且是「唯一可行方案、不存在推翻」 。

【法政巴絲】有人辭官歸故里 有人漏夜趕科場

就在老闆放完長假回來的那天,我忽然被召入會議室。心知不妙。 門一關上,老闆便宣讀他的判詞。「你是聰明人,我也開門見山了。經濟環境不好,我們的合約到月底就終止,而我們將會補上代通知金...」說罷,我已心裡淌淚。明明相安無事,怎麼突然就要我走?

義賣支持DQ4 (Charity Sale in Support of DQ4)

為支援DQ4的訴訟及其工作,法政匯思將出售300條DQ4手中的毛巾,全數不扣除成本撥捐「守護公義基金」。每條毛巾售價$100,閣下亦可額外捐款。如有興趣支持,請留言或私訊本專頁,我們會盡快回覆訂購詳情。敬請有錢出錢,有力出力及廣傳此帖,多謝支持!

20呎太空艙 呎租貴過山頂豪宅

樓價高企,令「太空艙」冒起,估計全港有逾百個,而且瞄準家住偏遠的上班族,部分月租達4,000元,呎租拍得住山頂豪宅,部分更標榜有「家的感覺」!但太空艙單位或涉各種違法問題,有大律師指,若租客與業主遇到爭拗,租客未必受保障。 本報近日在多個租樓網站發現,至少有10個單位出租太空艙,部分聲稱在不同地區都有經營太空艙,亦有在Airbnb提供日租,估計至少逾百個太空艙床位遍布港九。這些只有一張單人床大小的「居所」,月租由2,000至4,000元不等,呎租平均逾百元。據地產資料顯示,位於山頂白加道2號的豪宅,年初有逾3,000呎的獨立屋以28萬元租出,呎租約91元,太空艙呎租竟比豪宅更貴。

「阻住做生意」的一地兩檢

政府一地兩檢方案推出後,不少人把焦點放在能否在高鐵用社交媒體、內地人員在西九持槍、香港與內地刑法的分別。這些問題雖然搶眼,但普羅市民會說「不乘搭高鐵就可以了」或「去到羅湖都是這樣的」。建制派會說,可以討論把在西九與高鐵車廂內適用的內地法律收窄,以此把整個違反《基本法》的一地兩檢合理化。

【法政匯思月會】與四位前立法會議員之分享

法政匯思昨夜與其他專團有幸邀得四位前立法會議員梁國雄、劉小麗、羅冠聰和姚松炎分享他們的議政經驗,展望將來各專團能發揮所長與議員合作,携手監察政府施政,繼續為民主出力。 (We are honoured to have Mr. Nathan Law, Ms. Lau Siu-lai, Mr. Edward Leung and Mr. Leung Kwok-hung sharing their valuable experience with our members tonight. We look forward to further collaboration between lawmakers and different civil professional groups in examining the Hong Kong Government's for the continuous advancement of the democracy of Hong Kong.)

法政匯思:「我無犯法,因為我就是皇法。」

一地兩檢之於基本法之弊,許多有識之士均作出了詳盡的解釋,在此不贅。 「方案」推出後,各界、尤其是法律界人士紛紛以基本法為基礎指出其一地兩檢「方案」如何與基本法、一國兩制背道而馳——而所謂「方案」,你我心照,根本上可算是定局,無法回頭。儘管這些日子來,那些大量分析如何合理、如何一語中的,林鄭和我們本該捍衛法治憲法的律政司司長的一句「方案符合基本法」,配以擦鞋都來不及的一眾護主黨說得振振有辭的一堆歪理、指鹿為馬,就要使一個嚴重損害香港法制的一地兩檢上馬。為了官方聲稱、那少得可憐的「便利」,就把香港的地域主權雙手奉上,這筆數如何計,無人算得懂。

民主派成立一地兩檢關注組 批政府方案誤導公眾要求撤回

「一地兩檢」關注組共有94名發起人及團體代表,包括民間人權陣線、法政匯思、香港社會工作者聯會及12間大專院校學生會。關注組成員、立法會前議員吳靄儀表示,高鐵一地兩檢方案有違《基本法》,連日來政府的解畫是「理屈詞窮」,不斷胡言亂語以租客、業主比喻,或是《基本法》第7條、第20條等作解釋。她聲言,在香港心臟地帶實施內地法例違犯《基本法》18條,故要求當局撤回方案。

任建峰﹕為何要分析港獨的不可行?

港獨議題自從雨傘運動後逐漸開始在公共空間被廣泛討論。個人來說,我從來都是十分堅定反對港獨的,只是我尊重亦會捍衛支持港獨人士的言論自由。但一直以來,我都只是像很多反港獨人士一樣,本能反應地把港獨簡單地看成為不可能發生,甚至帶點中華民族感情去反對就算了。同樣地,支持港獨的人士亦只是很簡單地說「香港民族自主」、「武裝起義」,或「香港獨立」會有怎樣民主自由。

【異鄉人眼中的香港歷史2】脫下律師袍 寫下香港抗爭史

原為律師的Antony Dapiran在1994年由澳洲來港,他對香港歷史的興趣由抗爭而起,在雨傘運動期間撰寫報道,後追溯香港的抗爭歷史,寫下《City of Protest: A Recent History of Dissent in Hong Kong》。他最後選擇脫下律師袍,從文學角度繼續書寫。