www射-国产免费一级-欧美福利-亚洲成人福利-成人一区在线观看-亚州成人

Dissidents jump to redefine rule of law

Updated: 2017-08-23 07:15

By Lau Nai-keung(HK Edition)

  Print Mail Large Medium  Small 分享按鈕 0

Lau Nai-keung points out that right to protest does not mean a license to ride roughshod over everyone else

The Oxford English Dictionary defines "rule of law" this way: "The authority and influence of law in society, esp when viewed as a constraint on individual and institutional behavior; (hence) the principle whereby all members of a society (including those in government) are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes."

Rule of law implies every citizen is subject to the law. It stands in contrast to the idea that the ruler is above the law, for example by divine right.

The rule of law begins with the right of individuals to seek protection through the courts in which justice is administered by unbiased judges. It protects the freedom of individuals to manage their affairs without fear of arbitrary interference by the government or improper influence from the rich and powerful.

Dissidents jump to redefine rule of law

The rule of law governs the way in which power is exercised in Hong Kong. Its principal meaning is that the power of the government and all government officials should be derived from law as expressed in legislation and judicial decisions made by independent courts. No one, including the chief executive, can commit an act that would otherwise constitute a legal wrong or affect a person's liberty unless that person can point to a legal justification for that action.

However, this is not how the dissidents and their friends understand the concept. For them, rule of law means courts deliver judgments to their liking.

Take for example the recent Court of Appeal ruling on sentences for Joshua Wong Chi-fung, Nathan Law Kwun-chung and Alex Chow Yong-kang to prison over their involvement in the 2014 "Occupy Central" protests. For our dissidents, the city's rule of law is preserved if the trio does not need to go to jail; if the Court of Appeal decided the lower court was indeed too lenient in sentencing, rule of law is dead.

We are not sure how to understand this claim.

Last July, the trio was convicted on unlawful assembly charges. Wong was sentenced to 80 hours' community service, Law received 120 hours, while Chow received a three-week suspended jail sentence. How was our rule of law doing back then? Was it safe and sound because the jail sentence for Chow was merely a suspended one? And community service is like extracurricular activity, which if the court does not order Wong and Law the schools would have.

However, according to eminent international figures our rule of law died a sudden death after the suspended jail sentence turns into an unsuspended one. How flimsy our rule of law must be.

"The decision by the courts in Hong Kong to sentence three courageous, principled young men to jail yesterday is an outrageous miscarriage of justice, a death knell for Hong Kong's rule of law and basic human rights, and a severe blow to the principles of 'one country, two systems' on which Hong Kong was returned to China 20 years ago," a statement signed by 25 such public figures read.

This accusation is groundless and is adequately rebutted by the well-written judgment itself.

Acknowledging that according to the Basic Law and the Bill of Rights Ordinance, Hong Kong residents enjoy freedom of assembly, speech, march, demonstration and other methods of expression, judge Wally Yeung wrote in the judgment that "these freedoms are not absolute or without restrictions, and have to be in accordance with the law (If one) uses the guise of exercising freedom of assembly, but is in actual fact destroying public order and peace, (this) will plunge society into chaos, and will have a negative impact on societal progress and development, as well as prevent others from exercising their rights and freedoms. If these situations are not prevented, any talk of freedom and rule of law is empty."

Judge Jeremy Poon's logic was also overwhelming when he reminded us: "These offenders cannot say that the law is taking away or oppressing their freedom of speech and assembly, because the law never allowed them to use illegal methods to exercise these freedoms in the first place."

The New York Times and other foreign fake news forces can make martyrs out of these three young men all they like, but our rule of law remains as robust as it ever has been.

(HK Edition 08/23/2017 page7)

主站蜘蛛池模板: 在线视频一区二区三区四区 | caoporen在线视频入口 | 久久久精品免费视频 | a级片免费| 欧美精品亚洲人成在线观看 | 996久久国产精品线观看 | 日本韩国三级在线 | 亚洲爽爽 | 欧美日韩美女 | 日本www在线播放 | 久久久久国产成人精品亚洲午夜 | 俄罗斯a级毛片 | 欧美黄色一级在线 | 寡妇一级毛片 | 久色精品 | 99精品视频在线这里只有 | 一级特黄牲大片免费视频 | 日本久久久 | 国产成人精品久久综合 | 视频一区在线免费观看 | 精品一区二区三区免费爱 | 高清一区二区三区四区五区 | 最新亚洲精品国自产在线 | 免费一级做a爰片久久毛片 免费一级做a爰片性色毛片 | 久久国产亚洲精品 | 成年女人毛片免费播放视频m | 欧美成人观看免费版 | 久草在线免费资源 | 久久久久久久久久免免费精品 | 中文字幕有码在线播放 | 免费在线看黄网址 | 国产美女动态免费视频 | avtt天堂网永久资源手机版 | 亚洲专区在线 | 99精品视频在线在线视频观看 | 国产精品自拍合集 | 国产成人一区二区视频在线观看 | 国产91精选在线观看网站 | 国产精品99久久久 | 国产综合精品久久亚洲 | 成人午夜亚洲影视在线观看 |