【吳靄儀親自求情陳詞中文譯本】
818維園流水式集會非法集結案今日判刑，9名被告中各人被判囚8個月至18個月，當中資深大律師李柱銘，吳靄儀及前立法會議員何俊仁和梁耀忠被判緩刑。吳靄儀早上在求情階段解僱其代表律師，並親自作求情陳詞。她陳詞後庭內掌聲四起，及後各大傳媒亦刊出其陳詞英文全文。
本台特意將全份陳詞全文翻譯，以便廣大讀者了解吳大律師振振之詞，譯文如下：
Your honour, I am grateful to your honour for allowing me to make this statement about my background and the personal conviction I have held in what I did.
法官大人，多謝閣下容許本人作出幾以下聲明，闡明自己的背景與及過去所作所為的個人信念
I was called to the bar in 1988, but my early training was not in law. I had indulgent parent is who allowed me to spend 10 years in the university in Hong Kong and then in Boston to study philosophy. There I learned about rigorous intellectual honesty in the pursuit of truth and alleviation of the suffering of mankind.
我於 1988 年獲得大律師資格，但其實我並非法律出身。我接近放縱的父母容讓我於香港大學及波士頓花上十年修讀哲學。這段時間讓我學習到追求真相，以及減輕人類痛苦的路途上所需的知識誠信。
It was a sharp change for me to switch to law in 1981 when I went to Cambridge to read for a law degree. Those were the crucial years of Sino-British negotiations over the future of Hong Kong. My generation were embroiled in finding a way to preserve Hong Kong's freedoms and original way of life after the change of sovereignty. This was so important to all of us that, after I was called to the bar, I did not immediately start to practice, but took up an editorial post in the Ming Pao Daily News, because I accepted that it was critical to Hong Kong's future to have a strong free press, and at that stage I had some standing as a political commentator.
1981 年，我前往劍橋大學轉為修讀法律，當時為中英聯合聲明談判的關鍵時刻，對於我自己及香港的未來都是分水嶺。我們當代正努力尋求出路，希望找出移交主權後能夠保留香港原本的生活模式及自由的方法。但我當時並沒有直接從事法律工作，反而到《明報》當一名評論員，因為覺得自己作為是時事評論員有一定影響力，而香港一定要有新聞自由。
I resumed my legal career in 1990, but in 1995 I was persuaded to stand for election in the legal functional constituency. Your honour, the legal profession, steeped in the common law tradition of civil liberty, did not believe in unequal elections, but they considered that so long as there was such a seat, they would not allow anyone to compromise the rule of law in their name. So I was elected their representative to hold that office in trust for the people of Hong Kong, to use it to uphold the system under which their rights and freedoms are protected by law. I was charged with a dual mission: to do my utmost to prevent legislation that would harm the rule of law, and to safeguard the institutions that underpin the rule of law. At the top of the list was judicial independence, and the administration of justice.
我於 1990 年重新擔任法律的工作，但於 1995 年被遊說參與立法會選舉的法律界功能組別。法官閣下，法律專業深植於普通法的公民自由傳統，並不相信不平等的選舉；但他們仍認為只要有這樣的席位，就不會容許任何人在法治之下干預法治。所以我被選為香港人的代表，利用公職捍衛保障香港人權利和自由的法律系統。因此我承擔著兩項任務赴職：竭盡所能，防止立法系統干預法治，及維護支持法治的機構及結構，而當中最重要的就是司法獨立及彰顯公義。
Those were the tasks to which I had voluntarily pledged to carry out.
It meant, first of all, working conscientiously in LegCo's committees.
這些是我自願承諾要執行的任務。這意味著，在立法會的委員會中勤勤懇懇、一絲不苟地工作。
I served in LegCo for 18 years (including the year from July 1997 to August 1998 when I was without a seat), and for 17 of those years I sat as Chairman of the Panel of Administration of Justice and Legal Services which had oversight of policies concerning the Judiciary, judicial provisions and establishment, including the allocation of land and costs for court buildings, legal policies, legal aid, the organization of the legal profession, legal services, and legal education. Numerous issues were brought up, discussed and resolved.
我在立法會任職18年（包括從1997年7月至1998年8月我沒有席位的那一年），而其中有 17 年我畸擔任司法及法律事務委員會主席。我的職責在於監督司法政策，司法規定和機構的問題，其中包括為法院大樓分配土地和費用，法律政策，法律援助，組織法律專業人士，法律服務和法律教育。 年間不少問題被提出，討論和解決。
Some of the work required search for novel dispute resolution. At the height of the heated dispute within the profession over higher rights of audience for solicitors, I put the matter before the Chief Justice and respectfully asked him to intervene so that the matter may be resolved, and seen by all to be resolved, on the public interest and not by unseemly turf fight. It was vital for the rule of law that the public continued to have confidence in the legal profession.
有些問題需要尋求新穎的解決方法。 法律界曾在有關事務律師於高級法院的出庭發言權有過激烈爭拗，我將此事提請終審法院首席大法官，並恭請他介入以解決問題。法律應以公眾利益為優先考慮，而非地盤爭奪，此為令公眾持續對法律界持信心對法治至關重要。
The expansion of legal aid's supplementary scheme, assistance for unrepresented litigants, more user-friendly and helpful free community legal advice were among other examples for which extra effort had to be made to find solutions. Often there were setbacks. In 2002, when Audrey Eu SC was also in LegCo, we worked in partnership with NGOs on a proposal for a community legal services center, to give people timely and useful legal advice. Although it was rejected by the government at the time, in due course the idea bore fruit elsewhere.
擴大法律援助的補充計劃，為無律師代表的訴訟人提供援助，更人性化的免費社區法律諮詢等，都是以新穎方法處理問題的例子。路途上自然會有各種的挫折；2002 年，余若薇資深大律師同在立法會共事時，我們與非政府組織合作，提出了建立社區法律服務中心，以便為市民提供及時而有用的法律諮詢。即使當時遭到政府拒絕，但這個建議最終仍能夠在他處結出碩果。
I had found that, frequently, tact, diligence and patience were what was needed. But at other times, when a fundamental value was violated, strong statements and response were required. In June 1999, in the wake of the Court of Final Appeal's landmark decision on the right of abode in Ng Ka Ling, the NPCSC issued its first interpretation of the Basic Law to overturn the court's decision. This shook the world's faith in the power of final adjudication of the court. In protest, on 30 June, I and over 600 members of the legal profession went on a silent march, and stood in quiet respect and in solidarity in front of the CFA building then on Battery Path, to mark our unswerving support for the court in that critical hour, so that the community may not be demoralized.
我發現很多時候，都需要機智、勤奮和耐心。 但當基本價值或原則受到衝擊甚至被違反，就需要強而有力的聲明和回應。 1999 年 6 月，終審法院就吳嘉玲的居留權作出具有里程碑意義的裁決後，全國人大常委會就對《基本法》進行第一次釋法，並推翻法院的裁決。 這動搖了世界對法院終審判決權的信念。 6 月 30 日，我和 600 多位法律專業人士發起靜默遊行，在終審法院前以前向法庭表示敬意和聲援，以表示我們對法院的堅定支持，從而令到社會不因此灰心。
Your honour, the task in the defence of the rule of law also meant commitment to the process of law-making. I devoted a great deal of my time to vetting bills. It is recorded that I had worked in 155 bills committees. It is vital to the rule of law that the laws passed by the legislature are sound, rights-based, and measure up to the highest standards. For, judges are bound to apply the law as it is, not as what they would wish it to be. Lawyers are in a better position than most to know how a piece of legislation would work - or would not work - when it comes to be tested in the courts. In this I worked closely with the profession to whom I will always be grateful. We did our best to see to it that rights were not inadvertently or unnecessarily compromised. The law should give protection to rights, not take them away, especially in Hong Kong, where structural democracy is still absent. The people relied on the law to protect them, and the courts are the ultimate arbiter of the law. We are mindful that when the court applies a law which takes away fundamental rights, the confidence in the courts and judicial independence is shaken, even though the fault lies in the law, not with the judge who applies it, and that would strike at the foundation of our rule of law.
法官閣下，捍衛法治的任務意味著對立法過程要有承擔。我花了很多時間來審查議案據記錄，我曾在 155 個法案委員會工作。立法機關通過的法律要健全，要基於權利，要達到最高標準－這對法治至關重要。皆因法官必須按原樣法律，而非按他們的希望。律師比平常人比較容易明白一項法律在法庭上到底能不能經發揮作用。在這方面，我將永遠感激與我緊密合作的同行。我們竭盡所能，以確保權利不會被無意或不必要地損害。法律應該保障權利，而不是剝奪權利，尤其是在缺乏系統性民主的香港。人民曾依靠法律保護他們，而終審法院是法律的最終仲裁者。我們知道當法院執行剝奪基本權利的法律時，即使是法律的過錯而非法官的過失，市民對法院和司法獨立的信心也會動搖。
Your honour, the importance of that duty was driven home to me by the words of a distinguished judge - Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy of the United States Supreme Court as he then was - when he came to Hong Kong at the invitation of the then Chief Justice Andrew Li to give a speech to the Judiciary and the legal profession on 8 February, 1999. He was deeply moved by the challenges lying ahead of us, and the important role of an independent Judiciary. He submitted: "One requisite for judicial independence is that judges have the jurisdiction, the right, and the official capacity to decide all matters, susceptible to judicial resolution, that are necessary to ensure liberty and human freedom If a judiciary does not have jurisdiction to this extent, then the members of the bar and the members of the larger society must continue to press to expand the jurisdiction. This is vital, because if the bar and the society seem indifferent to a too-narrow judicial charter, there is a risk that the judiciary will in fact or perception aid and abet a larger scheme to deprive persons of their liberty."
法官閣下，我的職責的重要性是由一位傑出的法官-時任美國最高法院大法官Anthony Kennedy的話奠基的，當時他是應時任終審法院首席法官李國能的邀請來香港，於1999年2月8日向司法機構和法律界發表演說。Kennedy大法官為我們面臨的挑戰以及司法獨立的重要性動容。他指「司法獨立的一個必要條件是，法官擁有司法權、權利和官方權威，決定所有容易受到司法解決的事項，這些是確保自由和人的自由所必需的，如果司法機關在這種程度上沒有司法管轄權，所由大律師和社會的大部分成員必須繼續施加壓力以擴大管轄範圍，這是至關重要的，因為如果大律師和社會對過於狹窄的司法漠不關心，司法機構則有機會事實上或觀感上助紂為虐，協助或鼓勵一個剝奪人身自由的詭計。」
Those were strong words, your honour, but I recognized their authority, and I had ever taken them as marking the ultimate loyalty a barrister owes to judicial independence. Your honour knows that there is no disrespect, to say that the defence of judicial independence is not for the benefit of judges themselves, but so that they can be in a position fearlessly to uphold the rule of law.
雖然措詞強硬，但法官閣下，我認同當中的權威性，且視之為任何一個大律師忠於司法獨立的最高承諾。法官閣下知道，捍衛司法獨立不是為了法官，而是為了容許他們可以無畏無懼、公平公正地捍衛法治這個說法，並沒有絲毫不尊重。
The defence of the rule of law is a two-way street. I believed that the representative of the legal profession in LegCo has a duty also to listen, to consult and explain the law to the community: to alert people to their rights and obligations, to clarify what is obscure, to reduce bewilderment, to invite them to voice their concerns and point out errors, to address those concerns with sincerity, and represent them forcefully to the government; and where their needs cannot be addressed through the law, to work with them towards other solutions.
捍衛法治是一條雙向道。我相信自己作為立法會的法律界代表，有義務聆聽、諮詢並向大眾解釋法律：提醒他們的權利和限制、為不清楚處作澄清、減少困惑、邀請他們就關注之處發聲並指出謬誤，並真誠地解決這些問題，再代表他們強而有力地向政府提出。而當他們的需求不能透過法律表達，則和他們一起尋求其他解決方法。
One of the ways for me to keep in touch with the public was by writing articles to the local press, in plain language accessible to the general reader. For everyone ought to understand the law under which he lives. Throughout those years, and even up to pow, I have never abandoned that exercise. Less frequently, I publish academic articles and contributions to academic forums, particularly on matters in need of law reform.
多年以來至今，我都視在本地報章撰寫文章，以廣大讀者能明白的顯淺文字，為保持與大眾接觸的方法，且不曾停止。因為每個人都應該明自他們生活於何種的法律之下。我亦不時在學術論壇發表學術文章，特別就著需要法律改革的問題上更然。
Your honour, working with the government in LegCo had impressed upon me, that the rule of law is not just about the law, but equally about governance. For laws are made for the "peace, order and good governance of Hong Kong". Laws that protect rights tend to win the people's trust in their government, and trust facilitates good governance. So elected representatives have the duty to speak up to the government of the day: to advise and counsel, to admonish and to warn, constantly: do our laws take rights seriously? The law is not perfect and lawyers know more than anyone else how imperfect the law is. So why should people respect and obey the law? There are, of course, many answers, but the answer I gave myself is this: we can ask people to obey the law if it is the best approximation to justice. Which implies that we are duty bound to listen to criticisms of the law, and make sincere efforts to make the law better, and correct mistakes as much as possible. Justice is the soul of the law without which the rule of law descends to the level of rule by force, even if it is force by majority.
法官閣下，在立法會中和政府的共事令我留下一個深刻的印象——法治不僅與法律有關，而且與治理同樣重要。因法律是為了「香港的和平、秩序及良好管治」而制定，故保護權利的法律往往能為政府贏得人民信任，而信任能有助政府管治。故此當選代表有責任向當今的政府表達意見，包括提供諮詢、建議、告誡和警告：我們的法律有否尊重權利？法律並不完美，而律師比任何人都更清楚知道法律有多不完美。那為何人們要尊重並遵守法律呢？當然可以有許多答案，但是我給予的自答是：如果該法律和公義無限接近，我們可以要求人們服從法律。但這同時意味著我們有責任聆聽對法律的批評，並真誠地作出努力完善法律，並儘可能糾正錯誤。公義是法律的靈魂，沒有公義，就算有多數人支持，法治只會淪為暴政。
In the course of this trial, your bonour's attention was drawn to a debate on the POO in LegCo on 21 December 2000. In that debate, I pointed out the defects existing in its provisions. They were defects which had long troubled the legal profession, I warned the government that we must seriously consider reform if we were to avoid the law being disobeyed in desperation. Someone in a panel discussion had raised the issue of civil disobedience and the Secretary for Security had called it a threat. But it need not be taken as a threat, but should act as warning or reminder, I urged the government not to shut out rational discussion for reform, because by its recalcitrance, the government was in danger of creating the very conditions which made civil disobedience inevitable and justifiable: something which noce of us wished to see.
我望法官閣下能關注2000年12月21號，立法會就《公安條例》所作的辯論。當時我指出條例中存在許多缺陷。這些缺陷長期以來都困擾著法律界，而我亦警告政府，若要避免法律因人民的絕望而被違反，就必須認真考慮著手改革。委員會上曾有人提出公民抗命，當時保安局局長稱之為一種威脅。 然而它不應被視為威脅，而應作為一種警告或提醒。我敦促政府不要封殺就改革所進行合理的討論，但因為由於其頑固不化，政府創出公民抗命所不可避免和正當的條件——但這非我們中任何一人所望看到的。
Those years in LegCo had repercussions for me for life because, your honour, defending the rule of law means we ourselves must take rights seriously, and that is a lifelong endeavour.
擔任立法會議員工作的日子影響我一生，因為捍衛法治意味著我們需要更認真看待我們的權利，而這是窮其一生的責任。
There is no right so precious to the people of Hong Kong as the freedom of expression and the freedom of peaceful assembly. Not only is the freedom to speak the truth the core of human dignity, it is also the last safety valve in a democratie society, as remarked by our illustrious judges repeatedly. Respecting those rights is also part and parcel of defending the rule of law.
對香港人來說，沒有權利比言論自由和集會自由珍貴。言論自由不僅是人類尊嚴的核心，同時為民主社會的最後一道安全閥門，正如我們的一些優秀法官多次重申，尊重這些權利是捍衛法治的一部份。
I had learned that the rule of law not only has to be defended in court, or in LegCo, but also in the streets and in the community. Your honour, I had spoken countless times in LegCo. But I also realize that it is not good enough for me to make speeches in beautiful words and measured dignity in the precincts of the Legislative Council, shielded by the privilege of absolute freedom of speech and debate, and immunity from legal action. When the people, in the last resort, had to give collective expression to their anguish and urge the government to respond, protected only by their expectation that the government will respect their rights, I must be prepared to stand with them, stand by them and stand up for them. Otherwise, all my pledges and promises would be just empty words.
我被教曉法治不僅要在法庭內、或立法會捍衛法治，同時要在街道上及社會上捍衛。法官閣下，我在立法會發言過無數次，但我發現在絕對的言論和辯論自由，以及免於法律訴訟的特權保護罩下，在立法會範圍內以優美之言詞和端莊尊嚴作出演講是絕不足夠的。 當人民去到最後關頭，只憑著政府會尊重他們的權利作保護，要以集體的方式表達自己的憤怒並敦促政府回應，我不得不裝備自己與他們站在一起，站於一起，並為他們站出來。否則我所作過的承諾都只會淪為空談。
Your honour, the Hong Kong people is a peace-loving and well-disciplined people. Their resolute self-restraint even in highly emotional situations has been proved time and again. In the critical hours of the handover between 30 June and I July 1997, the great event passed without a hitch. In the march of half a million on 1 July 2003, not a single pane of glass was broken, Even in 2019, when over I million marched on 9 June, and over 2 million marched on 16 June. The pence and good order of the massive crowds astonished and won the admiration of the world.
法官閣下，香港人是一群愛好和平和自律的人民。他們已多次證明即使在氣氛緊張的場合，仍能保持高度克制。香港主權交接的緊要時刻時一切順利；2003年50萬人上街，街上一塊玻璃也沒破碎；甚至在2019年，當6月9日100萬人上街、之後200萬人走上街頭，大眾的和平及良好秩序都震驚全球，並換來世界的欽佩。
And in the incident of the present trial, this was demonstrated again. By the estimation of the organizers, over 1.7 million participated in the day's event. But whatever the exact figure, the huge and dense crowds in and around the venue, the resolute patience with which the crowds waited in the pouring rain, were captured in undisputed footages preserved for all posterity. The number and the perseverance spoke volumes for the intensity of the feelings in the community, and yet the self-restraint was for all to see. It is not disputed even by the prosecution that the event was entirely peaceful and orderly, without any untoward event. The crowd had kept faith with the organizers who enjoined them to be "peaceful, rational and non-violent". At such times we cannot be seen to abandon the people but must stand side by side with them, in the hope that peace may prevail.
而這種情況在是次審訊的事件中再次被證明。 據主辨者估算，當日超過170萬人參加活動。 無論實際數字多寡，傾盆大雨中，在維園內外以堅韌耐心等待的巨大而密集的人群，都毫無爭議地被保留在傳世的鏡頭中。人數和忍耐代表了社會情緒的高漲，但人民的自我約束亦是眾所皆知的。 是案中控方亦沒有爭議，該事件是完全和平有序的，沒有任何不幸的事情發生。 參與群眾與主辦方都保持著「和平、理性、非暴力」的信念。故至此我們不能被視為拋棄人民，反而必須與人民並肩站在一起，希望和平能夠戰勝一切。
The positive effect of the peacefulness of that demonstration was acknowledged by the CE, Mrs Carrie Lam 2 days later, remarking that it would facilitate dialogue between government and the public. In the event, the dialogue on that occasion did not continue for long, but it was a step in the right direction. I believe we should nurture hope, and continue, as Justice Kennedy urged upon the legal profession gathered together in that distinguished company: You must speak reason to your litigants. You must speak justice to society. You must speak truth to power.
林鄭月娥在2日後便表示，是次示威的和平有序能促進人民和政府的對話，變相承認此和平有序之示威的正面效應。雖然該對話未有持續太長，但始終是朝正確的方向的一步。正如大法官Kennedy向一群法律專才所作的呼籲：「必須向訴訟人說理由、必須向社會說公義、必須向權力說真相」，我認為我們需要繼續培育希望。
Your honour, I came late to the law, I have grown old in the service of the rule of law, I understand Sir Thomas More is the patron saint of the legal profession, He was tried for treason because he would not bend the law to the King's will. His famous last words were well authenticated. I beg to slightly adapt and adopt them: I stand the law's good servant but the people's first. For the law must serve the people, not the people the law.
法官閣下，雖然我的法律生涯較遲開始，但我是在獻身法律之下成長至老的，亦明白到 Sir Thomas More 之所以被譽為法律聖徒的原因；他不願意為皇帝屈曲法律，因此被判叛國。他的終言有多人印證過；我亦希望自己微略修改之下，能夠以此為格言：我是法律的僕人，但首先是人們的僕人；因為法律侍奉人民，而非人民侍奉法律。
Your honour, please permit me to thank my counsel. Their tireless dedication and excellence have made me proud to be a member of the bar.
This is my statement. Thank you, your honour.
法官閣下，請容許我感謝我的代表大律師。他們孜孜不倦的奉獻令同樣作為大律師的我感到自豪。
以上是我的陳詞，有勞法官閣下。
Dated the 16th Day of April, 2021
2021年4月16日。
文/Mc, N
吳靄儀- 维基百科，自由的百科全书
https://zh.wikipedia.org › wiki › 吳靄...
吳靄儀（英語：Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee，1948年1月25日－），香港執業大律師（1988-），衛奕信任內中央政策組官方智囊（1989-90），香港立法會法律界功能組別議員（1998-2012）。香港公民黨黨員。 歸化英國籍。 事業以英語時事評論 ...
吳靄儀 的道路(4)：人權獎。《紅樓夢》之「攬炒」。吳靄儀步出警署後受訪逐字稿 China...
2020.07.12
整個面書都在討論李柱銘和鄧炳強，但今日令我最深刻的，卻是吳靄儀步出警署後這個「扑咪」。整個訪問不是太長，卻很能反映吳靄儀其人，讀過她的回憶錄《拱心石下》，再聽完這六分鐘，只覺她是個不亢不卑、始終如一、堅定不移的人，讓人由衷佩服。在這個沒甚麼能做的晚上，為這個訪問打了逐字稿。
---
我今年72歲，第一次被人控告，我很感謝律師團體一直幫我，在這個經歷中我更明白，被捕的人有律師幫助是很重要的，我們有義務律師幫抗爭者，事實上是很重要很重要的事。我亦希望我們爭取多年要有法援律師在警署協助被捕人士，我希望今次之後更多人了解到，這真是很重要的法律服務。
（從事法律工作多年，今日自己成為被告，心情是如何？）
我第一次真的經歷整個程序，當然有助我了解，但我覺得我所經歷的，可能是比所有人都沒那麼恐怖和恐懼，可以想像其他人在這個程序中，是會有很重的心理壓力。我覺得其實最主要問題，是現在的《公安條例》是否合理、合法、合乎人權的條例。這我覺得是很需要繼續探討。
（你將會面對刑事的聆訊，你覺得可以探討《公安條例》的機會有多少？）
我講一些老套的說話吧，我跟我的律師團隊商量後會決定怎樣做。但我重申一句：有律師幫你是很重要的。特別是在這過程中，即使是在現場陪伴你，令你知道程序是怎樣都非常重要。我希望所有香港人都可以安全地享有其法律權利。
（近期不少市民都對法治失去信心，今次你自己都成為被告，你怎樣看現時法治的狀況？）
向來要維護法治都是很艱難很艱難的工程，從我執業第一日開始，以至九七年我們為居留權打官司，無論在終審法院、原訟庭、上訴庭或裁判署，都是很艱難的。法治之下，每個人的自由和人權是受到保障，但在法庭面前，誰去幫你維護權利？這才是重要的問題。所以我覺得，如果我們說「法治已死」便放棄用法律服務幫被告或被捕者，這是絕對講不通的。
當法治很危急時，你要walk out，抑或你要stand and fight？這是我們法律界人士最重要的精神。當情勢越惡劣，我們越要堅決為我們的當事人辯護，為香港人爭取自由。我們是不可以放棄的，即使我們的心情何等惡劣，我們都不能被心情蓋過我們的責任。所以就算是法律在很危急的情況，我們都永遠不可以放棄我們的當事人，如果今日不是有律師幫忙，就算是我自己都會感受到無助。所以「法治已死」與否，並不是最重要的討論，最重要的是身為法律界人士，我們打算用怎樣的力量，在這法律制度之下，去保障香港人的人權和自由。
（今日看到你拿著一本有關法治的書籍，有沒有甚麼意思？）
我剛剛在外面收到消息，知道警方正在找我。當時我正在帶住一本書（China's National Security: Endangering Hong Kong's Rule of Law?），這本書很值得大家去讀。最近大家都在討論23條立法，這本書是兩年前香港大學一個研討會中，談到23條始終都要來，我們如何用我們的制度，令到在國家安全這大前提底下要香港進行23條立法時，我們的制度都可夠堅強去維護法治，這本書有很多當時的演講稿，以及學者文章中的看法。我今日「做功課」時正在讀這本書，所以才取了出來，不是特意拿進警署講法治的，才沒有人會有空聽我講。
（應記者要求拿著書拍照時不忘繼續推介）
真的值得一讀，只是看（香港大學法律學院教授）傅華伶講中國中央政權如何看國家安全，他們為何需要23條立法，都已經值回票價。
正義與人生- 吳靄儀｜ 蘋果日報
正義與人生 - 吳靄儀
更新時間 (HKT): 2021.03.14 02:00
/cloudfront-ap-northeast-1.images.arcpublishing.com/appledaily/XHPHSIHZQJEDJMFN3AYDX5GB2A.JPG)
/arc-static.appledaily.com/hk/avatar/columnist/%E5%90%B3%E9%9D%84%E5%84%80.png)
作者 : 吳靄儀AAA
我的啟蒙很遲，大概要到二十三、四歲，到我在美國唸博士學位那個時候，但那跟博士研究無關。一天，我閒閒向導師教授提起，不知如何，我努力奮鬥的都是lost causes。導師說，lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for，只有沒希望的目標才值得爭取。後來，有人問我，你對香港前途樂觀還是悲觀？我的答案是樂觀、悲觀都不重要，香港是我的責任。最近看到「好青年荼毒室」的一篇充滿哲學意味的文章，探討政治運動需不需希望。「從政者要令人們感到希望」，好像已是老生常談了，但好青年荼毒室文持不同意見，大致上說，如果都靠希望才能奮鬥下去，那麼一個政治運動就很容易成為施壓的對象，對方目的是以壓力磨滅你的希望，那麼運動就完蛋了。文章建議，有另一個思想，就是將運動的力量建基於「義」之上。爭取公義，行正義之上，追求社會公義，做應做之事，因為這是義所當為，那麼運動的力量就不會因外在因素而消滅了。我很喜歡這篇文章，跟我自己的宗旨十分契合。其實我很喜歡好青年荼毒室。
義所當為，用現代話講，就是責任心。以承擔責任而盡心履行，無疑令人無懼風雨、不計寒暑地生活，但純為責任的問題，就是人生會很苦，不會像為希望而奮鬥，藉奮鬥創造希望那麼激昂，所以有如天天服毒藥，需要有解藥。
解藥是朋友。朋友就是朋友，不需要理念相同，甚或屬同一戰綫，只要互相投契，可以愉快相處，一起做彼此認為開心的事。有些人很注重「分享」，比如與朋友分享自己的感受和經歷，我覺得這並不重要，很多事是不用說的，而且說了就有可能變質，沒有必要倒不如不說。在最失意的時候，最好跟有空的朋友喝杯茶，或看一齣電影，或行山或散步，不用「分享」你苦惱的因由，已經可以得到安慰——但如果沒得到呢？那也不要緊，反正你已享受了一杯茶，或者一齣電影或者一次散步。我覺得分享（無論分享什麼，除了食物）is an over-rated activity——被人高估了的活動。到最後，只有自己才能為自己解決問題，但有朋友可以愉快或安詳地在一起，你為自己解決問題的能力忽然會倍增。
回到我的老導師，他的話驟聽很沒道理。為目標而奮鬥，不是希望成功嗎？無法成功得到的目標不是正好要放棄，免得沮喪和絕望嗎？其實想想就知道智慧何在。我彷彿聽到他說（雖然實際上他沒說）：有希望的目標必定已有很多人鬥志高昂地爭取了，不少我這一個，那些已無人承擔的，必然是最難得的，古往今來，例子多得很。
*****
Lam, Jabez 林懷燿 - British Chinese Heritage Centre
Stand News 立場新聞
2019 年，何韻詩在倫敦辦演唱會，場外親共組織踩場，影大頭相、撩何韻詩的支持者打交，向他們扔雞蛋。片中一半的踩場者，林懷燿都認得，當中不少便是當年六四後的政治庇護者。
既然申請得政治庇護，多少都應該有反共立場。為甚麼如今會變成親共？
林懷燿說，中國大使館尤其懂得一套手段。
「利用華人受到歧視嘅事實。」他解釋說。「你同嗰啲人打交道，時時都會聽到一句說話﹕我哋大家中國人。一聽到呢句就知仆街，跟住佢就係搵你笨柒。」
這句話的邏輯是透過喚起海外華人受到歧視的共同經驗，呼召民族主義，引導之成為支持中共、支持中華民族偉大復興的意志。林懷燿的說法是，80 年代能夠留英讀書的中國人，多少背後都有點「關係」。這些人在英國，卻因華人身份受到歧視，求職艱難，對他們來說最好的選擇就是利用自身語言和地理優勢，做中國生意。至於他們是因為與中國關係太過密切所以成為了愛國者，抑或「一開始就係間諜」？林懷燿說他「唔敢講」......
THESTANDNEWS.COM
【帶著黃藍去英國．5】專訪林懷燿 — 他幫過的六四流亡者，變了揮拳的「老粉紅」 | 立場人語 | 立場新聞
「呢個白頭佬，『揸巴士』，打佢個仆街﹗」倫敦唐人街上，偌大的五星紅旗如棉被蓋下，一把女聲響起，...
1,7581,758
128則留言
393次分享
讚
留言
分享
沒有留言:
張貼留言