User:Bluedecklibrary/Draft:2017年香港三名政治人物入狱事件

Bluedeck Library 图书馆卡

Bluedeck Library 图书馆卡

本页面为“Draft:2017年香港三名政治人物入狱事件”的存档，该页面已遭删除，本页面仅供参考用。

存档UTC时间	2018年4月23日 02:30
存档编者	Bluedeck
当前版本号	49238337

取得正常维基源码

{{vfd|廢棄草稿|date=2018/04/21}}

{{Infobox event | title = 2017 imprisonment of Hong Kong democracy activists | image = 20170820 March in support of jailed Hong Kong activists 2.jpg | image_size = | image_upright = | image_alt = | caption = Supporters of the jailed activists marching on 20 August 2017 |native_name = | native_name_lang = | english_name = | time = | duration = | date = {{start date|2017|08|17}} | venue = | location =香港 | coordinates = | also_known_as = | type = Imprisonment | theme = | cause = Their roles in a protest at the Civic Square | first_reporter = | budget = | patron = | organisers = | filmed_by = | participants = 黃之鋒、羅冠聰、周永康 | outcome = Applauded by the pro-Beijing camp but decried by pro-democracy figures in Hong Kong | casualties1 = | casualties2 = | casualties3 = | reported deaths = | reported injuries = | reported missing = | reported property damage = | burial = | inquiries = | inquest = | coroner = | arrests = | suspects = | accused = | convicted = 3 | charges = | trial = | verdict = | convictions = | sentence = 6 (Wong), 7 (Chow) and 8 (Law) months in prison | publication_bans = | litigation = | awards = | url = | blank_label = | blank1_label = | blank2_label = | website = | notes = }}

2017年8月1日，三名香港政治人物，黃之鋒、羅冠聰和周永康，被香港高等法院上訴法庭判以监禁。原因是 their roles in a protest at the {{tsl|en|Civic Square (Hong Kong)||Civic Square}} in front of the 香港特別行政區政府總部 (建築物) in 添馬, 金鐘, on 26 and 27 September 2014. The events at the Civic Square helped set off 雨傘革命, sometimes referred to as the 雨傘運動佔領區, which lasted until police cleared the last of the protest sites in December 2014.

The three had originally been convicted and given {{tsl|en|community service||community service}} orders or, in the case of Chow, a 缓刑. The government appealed their sentences and successfully pursued harsher punishments. The trio's imprisonment was applauded by the 建制派 but decried by pro-democracy figures in 香港 as well as international politicians and 人权 advocates, who have called the activists Hong Kong's first 良心犯, and alleged that the sentence is intended to intimidate other would-be activists.

The sentence also disqualifies the three from running for office for five years, quashing their political aspirations in the near future. Wong had previously sought election but was barred due to his age, while Law, democratically elected to the 香港立法會 in September 2016, was removed from office in July 2017 following a 香港立法會宣誓風波.

背景

当事人

黄之锋（最右）和其他学生于2014年9月23日在香港抗议时的情景

黄之锋、罗冠聪和周永康一直是近年来比较显眼的民主活动家。就读于香港公开大学的黃之鋒在2011年与同伙们一起创立了學民思潮。许多民间组织积极抵制香港教育局提出的“德育及國民教育科”，学民思潮在其中表现突出。黃之鋒随后参与了雨伞革命（占中）。2016年3月20日，学民思潮停止运作，黄之锋随后与同僚们于2016年创立了民主派政党香港眾志。

羅冠聰是一位香港嶺南大學的本科生、香港眾志的主席。他以前担任过嶺南大學學生會的各项职务和香港專上學生聯會的秘书长。2016年香港立法會選舉期间，他在香港島選區胜出，当选为香港有史以来最年轻的立法会议员。2017年7月14日，香港立法會宣誓風波爆发。香港政府采取法律行动，将罗冠聪等6名议员的议席褫夺。

周永康就读于香港大學，曾经是香港大學學生會的副主席和香港专上学生联会的秘书长。他是雨伞运动的早期组织者之一。

政治背景

{{see also|2016年及2017年香港政治制度改革}} 香港特別行政區行政長官是特区政府的行政首长及政府首脑。中華人民共和國香港特別行政區基本法的第45条规定“香港特别行政区行政长官在当地通过选举或协商产生，由中央人民政府任命。行政长官的产生办法根据香港特别行政区的实际情况和循序渐进的原则而规定，最终达至由一个有广泛代表性的提名委员会按民主程序提名后普选产生的目标”。 Following the transfer of Hong Kong to China in 1997, the pro-democratic camp pushed for the election of the chief executive in 2007 through universal suffrage. On 26 April 2004, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC), a mainland Chinese legislative body, ruled out the possibility that universal suffrage would be allowed in 2007. In 2007, the NPCSC ruled out the 2012 election of the legislature and chief executive through universal suffrage, but stated that the Legislative Council and the chief executive could be elected through universal suffrage in 2016 and 2017, respectively. {{see also|831 decision}} However, democratic aspirations stalled on 31 August 2014, when the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress in Beijing made {{tsl|en|831 decision||a decision}} that chief executive candidates in 2017 would be required to "love the country and love Hong Kong"; that all candidates would be screened by a nominating committee of a composition paralleling the existing Election Committee, which is dominated by pro-Beijing interests; and that any chief executive elected through these means would then have to be appointed by the Chinese government. The decision was intensely decried by the pan-democratic camp, who said the arrangement would not amount to genuine democracy.

2014 Civic Square protests

香港公民广场，两图分别摄于2012年和2014年

导致判决的事件发生在香港特別行政區政府總部前院的东翼（{{tsl|en|Civic Square (Hong Kong)||公民广场}}。新修的政府总部于2011年开放，由建筑师{{tsl|en|Rocco Design Architects||Rocco Yim}}设计，其理念为“门永远开放”，象征着香港人对“治理的开放和透明”的骄傲。 In keeping with this design concept, the Civic Square was originally open to the public when the new government headquarters was inaugurated in 2011.

这个广场成为了政治示威活动的热门地点。2014年中旬，这里爆发力反对实行新界東北發展計劃的数次抗议活动。作为回应，2014年7月16日前后，work began on a permanent three-metre high metal fence, closing off the Civic Square from Tim Mei Avenue. The Hong Kong government stated that the barrier was a necessary security measure while others stated that the move ran contrary to Hong Kong people's right to freedom of assembly, which is codified in the Basic Law. The government responded that protests would be allowed in the square on public holidays if the director of the Administration Wing consented in advance. Other areas of the complex were fortified at the same time as the Civic Square.

Concurrently with the fortification of the square, the government's controversial democratic reform proposals, coupled with the {{tsl|en|831 decision||831 decision}}, were triggering discontent and protests. On 22 September 2014, students launched a week-long class boycott campaign, coupled with demonstrations at the government complex. At around 22:30 on 26 September 2014, protesting students scaled the fence that had been erected in July in an attempt to "retake" the Civic Square. Police managed to regain control of the square, and {{tsl|en|Kettling||kettled}} dozens of protesters on the circular base of the flagpoles, where they were denied access to water and the toilet. At the same time, a large number of protesters amassed outside the Civic Square. The square was cleared by police by the end of the following day, with more than 60 people arrested. Wong, Chow, and Law were among those arrested.

The incident immediately helped kick off the 2014 Hong Kong protests, also known as the Umbrella Movement, which saw the motorway in front of the government complex, Harcourt Road, occupied by protesters until 11 December 2016.

法律诉讼

东区裁判法院, where the trio initially received noncustodial sentences in August 2016

初步判刑

2016年7月21日，东区裁判法院认定黄之锋和周永康犯有非法集会罪，而罗冠聪则因煽动他人参与非法集会罪被定罪。这些都是双学三字的首例犯罪行为。黄之锋煽动他人参加非法集会活动的罪名被撤销。

2016年8月15日，三人被判刑。黄之锋被判以80个小时{{tsl|en|community service order|社区服务令|社区服务令}}，罗冠聪被判以120个小时的服务令。周永康被判以三个星期的监禁，缓刑一年来让他按计划前往倫敦政治經濟學院学习。

判决结束后，罗冠聪表示三子尊重法庭的决定，但他仍然认为公民广场是公共空间、是市民表达政治意见的地方。三位被告仍然对公安條例有质疑。

The trio subsequently served these initial sentences.

复审

律政司不同意判决。2016年9月，它要求对复审判决。律政司认为三人并“沒有真誠悔意”，因此社区服务令“明顯不足”。

2016年9月21日，覆核聆讯展开。判官认为原来的判决和推理已经足够，而且该部门没有为加重刑罚提供足够的证据。律政司将活动家与歹徒进行了比较，裁判官张天雁则表示他们只是在表达自己的政治信仰，加重刑罚并不公平。张天雁表示，在类似案件中有非监禁刑罚的先例，并驳回了加重刑罚的请求。

2016年10月，{{tsl|en|Court of Appeal (Hong Kong)||上诉法院}}同意听取政府对原判的上诉。

Law, Wong, and Chow speaking to media and supporters before entering court on 17 August 2017

2017年8月17日，上诉法庭裁定黄之锋和周永康犯有非法集会罪，分别判以六个月和七个月的监禁；罗冠聪煽动他人参加非法集会，被判以八个月的监禁。

判刑还剥夺了三位活动家在未来五年内竞选公职的权力。罗冠聪曾是民选产生的立法会议员，黄先生表示希望今后可参选，他此前由于过于年轻无法参加2016年立法会选举。

Imprisonment

Pik Uk Correctional Institution, a maximum security youth prison where Wong is held

Wong was sent to Pik Uk Correctional Institution, a maximum security facility for male prisoners below the age of 21.

罗冠聪和周永康被转入了壁屋惩教所，他们将在那里等候，直至转入监狱。

各界反应

香港

是次判決在香港反应不一。泛民主派和民权活动界的政治人物對其批评較多，他们认为刑罚不成比例，不满于律政司司长提出上诉，而且坐席法官不考虑三位当事人的行为公民不服从（可造成缓刑）。而建制派则认为判决十分合理。The legal profession has also responded to allegations by the media that the Hong Kong judiciary had been influenced or controlled by the Communist Party of China through the Hong Kong Bar Association and the Law Society of Hong Kong, stating that there is no indication of such influence.

判刑时，Joshua Wong wrote in a series of tweets that the sentence will not halt the activism for universal suffrage and democracy, or "赢得香港人的心". 其他香港的泛民主派政治人物也批评了法院的裁决。Academic Benny Tai at The University of Hong Kong, who also faces prosecution for his role in the 2014 protests, stated that civil disobedience to "challenge the law or acts of injustice by the government" is a necessary part of a civilised society.

也有人对律政司司长提出的上诉做出了批评。梁锦松律师代表的进步律师团体表示他们“强烈反对政府把政治问题看作“治安”问题，把重点放在起诉抗议者身上”。前香港大律师公会主席、公民党政治家梁家傑评论称上诉“一定有政治动机”。而另一位大律师工会的前任主席石永泰则认为，没有足够的证据表明上诉涉及到了政治因素。石永泰还呼吁律政司司长袁国强解释上诉原因，以提高上诉决定的透明度。律政司司长袁国强本人也回复称他的判没有任何“政治动机”。

2017年8月18日晚，社會民主連線在荔枝角收押所外举行集会、反对判决。数个不同的组织在2017年8月20日公然举行了抗议游行，游行在修頓球場开始，在終審法院大樓结束。他们认为这是“可耻”的“政治迫害”，要求香港当局“释放政治犯”。抗议者们将他们的批评集中在袁國強上，他忽视了最高检察官提出的上诉。

建制派成员则支持监禁“双学三子”。香港第一大建制派政党民主建港協進聯盟（民建聯）的主席李慧琼，表示“任何非法暴力行為都要付上的法律代價”、香港市民们“千萬不要以身試法”。民建聯的副主席周浩鼎认为三子的“罪行非常嚴重”、“行為不負責任”，而且“無真誠悔意”。等待判決时保衛香港運動的成员还在用扬声器一直大声播放歌曲《喜氣洋洋》和《鐵窗紅淚》，判决后他们还指三人「入獄找數」，認為刑期「實在係太短」，不过，「好過無」。

中国大陆

据环球时报报道，“这项判决将是香港治理的里程碑。从现在开始，可以根据这个先例判处暴力抗议抗议的人有罪，他们将需要去监狱”。

2017年8月18日，中华人民共和国外交部发言人华春莹主持的例行记者会中谈到了此事，她表示：

{{cquote|香港是法治社会，居民依法享有充分的权利和自由，但任何人都不能打着“民主”、“自由”等幌子进行违法暴力活动。特区法院是以事实为依据，按照香港法律对有关案件作出判决。我想重申，香港是中国的特别行政区，香港事务属于中国内政，中方坚决反对任何外部势力干预特区事务，干预香港司法独立。}}

国际社会

蔡英文总统的办公室发表声明表示了台湾对监禁刑罚“深切的遗憾”

中华民国（台湾）政府对监禁表示“深切的遗憾”，并重申了台湾“长期以来支持香港市民追求民主、自由、法治和人权的立场”。民主進步黨表示“愈发严重的压制只会引发更多的阻力”，政府发言人则表示：“香港当局应该认真对待‘香港人想要选择自己的生活方式和政治制度’这一事实”。

美国民主党的领导人蘭希·佩洛西在美国众议院表示该执政是不公正的 "shock the conscience of the world". She described the prison sentence as an "egregious decision", and that the resulting disqualification of Wong, Law and Chow to run for public office was unjust. She also regarded the sentence to be against "the basic notions of freedom and democracy".

25位国际人士公布了一项联合声明，认为这一监禁是“非常不公正”的。署名者对雨伞运动给予了高度的评价，并认为判刑“是一个无耻的司法错误，是香港法治和基本人权的丧钟，严重打击了‘一国两制’的原则”。声明由知名政客、维权活动家和前政治犯签署，这包括了{{tsl|en|David Alton||David Alton}}、{{tsl|en|Paddy Ashdown||Paddy Ashdown}}、{{tsl|en|Sonja Biserko||Sonja Biserko}}、查爾斯·波、{{tsl|en|Fiona Bruce||Fiona Bruce}}、{{tsl|en|John Dayal||John Dayal}}、Andrew Khoo、大衛·喬高、{{tsl|en|John McCarthy (ambassador born 1947)||John McCarthy}}、穆罕默德·纳希德、{{tsl|en|Geoffrey Nice||Geoffrey Nice}}、{{tsl|en|Consiglio Di Nino||Consiglio Di Nino}}、{{tsl|en|Grover Rees III||Grover Rees III}}、馬爾科姆·里夫金德、{{tsl|en|Janelle Saffin||Janelle Saffin}}、查尔斯圣地亚哥、克里斯·史密斯、{{tsl|en|Charles Tannock||Charles Tannock}}、阿利萨·瓦希德和Zarganar。 The group also questioned whether punishing the activists twice (as Wong, Law, and Chow have already served their initial community service orders) contravenes provisions against {{tsl|en|double jeopardy||double jeopardy}} in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

学术界

香港大學法律學院讲师张达明质疑为什么上诉法院认为被告的行为是“严重暴力”，早些时候东区法官已经清除了这三人犯下的任何暴力行为。He stated that there did not seem to be any evidence presented that the three committed violence, and questioned whether the Court of Appeal had effected a "substantial and grave injustice". He said there were grounds for the three to appeal the ruling to the Court of Final Appeal, 香港最高法院。

人权组织

人权观察的发言人对裁决作出了批评

各个人权组织也表示反对判决。人权观察的发言人索菲·理查森表示把三人关入监狱的努力並非考量公共秩序，而是一種心虛的政治動作，目的仅仅是“阻止3人參選立法會，同時阻嚇未來的抗議活動”。國際特赦組織的女发言人梅布尔·金则表示當局利用措辭含糊的罪名，堅持惡意追擊學生領袖，是基於政治目的之『秋後算帳』。

人权观察研究员王松莲这样说道：“这是香港的一个分水岭。它现在有了政治犯……对于任何想要抗议的人来说，严酷监禁刑罚的前景现在将笼罩在他们身上”。

Other jailings

本条目重点介绍了2017年最显眼的三名被监禁活动家。The high-profile imprisonment of Wong, Law, and Chow spurred some Hong Kong media outlets to compile lists of all individuals who have allegedly been imprisoned for political reasons. On 15 August 2017, 13 protesters who stormed the Legislative Council building in June 2014 (during a protest against the planned North East New Territories new towns) were handed prison sentences of eight to 13 months after a similar push by the Department of Justice for more severe sentences than the community service orders they originally received.

参见

• 曾德成
• 梁颂恒
• 游蕙桢

参考来源

{{reflist|30em}}

外部链接

• SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE v. WONG CHI FUNG AND OTHERS (17/08/2017, CAAR4/2016)

{{HKafter1997}}

Category:雨傘革命 Category:2017年香港 Category:香港罪案 Category:香港人權