english speech sample的八卦，Yahoo名人娛樂都在討論

在托福和雅思講話速度是高分關鍵嗎?

實際上，言語表達的速度是托福評分委員第一個會去注意的重點。

同學們可以運用老師的示範例題來精進自己答題的速度和流暢性:

TOEFL Sample Answers with Script: https://goo.gl/FRqqUs

留意示範的速度，但是自己在唸的時候不用一開始就刻意讓自己講得很快。記得你現在是在學習的階段，在過程中讓自己的速度接近最佳速率即可! 連結中的講稿也會協助各位同學習得一些有用的詞彙跟片語，這樣往後在應答的時候就可以減少自己思索詞彙的時間 ，這才是達到高分的關鍵!

詳細說明:

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

在托福考試中口說的部分，各位考生會被以3項評核標準來給予評分:

(1.) Delivery 表達
(2.) Language Use 語言使用
(3.) Topic Development 話題發展

今天，就要帶著大家一起來鑽研托福口說「Delivery 表達」，而這個環節又牽涉到流暢性 (fluency)、發音 (pronunciation)、聲調 (intonation) 、和可理解度 (intelligibility) 。這些評分標準在雅思公開評分表也有出現!

☆☆☆☆ Fluency ☆☆☆☆

流暢性(fluency)常會同時主觀地和規則化地依照考生當下論述的速度來做評估，而在考 試過程中，考生比較常犯的錯會是: 中間有太多不必要的停頓 (unnecessary pauses)、 錯誤的開場白 (e.g. She...er, "he" was late)、錯誤地把某些音節的念法加長 (lengthened syllables)、不斷重覆之前提過的語句和反覆使用相同的單字片語 (retraces and repetition)。

托福考官究竟是如何去判定一位考生口語流暢度的好壞呢? 根據托福考試的相關研究顯示 ，考官最常以同學們說話的速度 (speech rate)、猶豫的頻率(hesitations)、是否不斷一 直重複語句以及反覆修補答題內容 (repetition and repair) 這幾個項目給予評分。根據ETS的統計，應答速率最好每秒鐘大約涵蓋4個音節(例如:在一秒內說完I’m speaking fast這個句子)，而一般母語人士的平均速度大約是每秒鐘涵蓋5個音節左右(例如:在一秒 內說完I'm speaking quickly這個句子)，所以若以此來做區分，一般程度較高的考生， 他們的平均速度大概會落在每秒鐘說4.4個音節，而中等程度的其他考生會是每秒鐘說3.3 個音節左右的速度。

Sources:
https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-13-13.pdf#page=19

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

所以現在問題來了，是只要口語表達的速度越快，就絕對會幫你取得高分嗎? 當然不是，不要忘記前面所提到的 (2.) 語言應用能力和 (3.)主題內容延伸這兩個項目耶是會被列入口語測驗的整體表現評核喔!然而，同學們還是要瞭解，運用適中的速度作答其實對各位在 Delivery 這個向度取得高分是絕對必要的。

同學們常常會誤以為托福的口說測驗，只要放慢速度作答就OK，而放慢速度乍看之下是直覺上可行的一個做法，因為如果將回答的速度放慢，相對地也會給考生更多的時間去思考並減少語法上可能犯的錯誤，但是在這邊必須告訴各位同學，這樣是沒辦法幫各位取得高分的。

因為一旦放慢了講話的速度，其實第一時間就影響了你應答的流暢性了。所以，同學們在平常準備時是否就應該講得快一些呢? 在這邊要提醒，同學們要懂得去區分語言學習以及考試評分之間的差別，初學者理當在剛開始沒辦法講得太快，因為他們還需要時間去回想可以用的一些詞彙和該詞彙的正確發音，但是在實際參加考試的時候，言語表達的速度絕對是評分的其中一個指標，評分者不會去特別顧慮你是不是初學者，這一點同學們一定要知道，而實際上，言語表達的速度也是評分委員第一個會去注意的重點。

再者，大部分的同學所面臨的問題，其實並不是作答的時候講得太快，從而需要放慢速度來減少語法上的錯誤。考生們實際缺乏的是足夠的字彙量和正確的語法知識背景，因而無法表達自己的想法，也因為這樣就迫使考生們在答題過程中必須停下來去思索一些自己平常不太會用的詞彙或片語。不幸的是，由於本身對於一些基本詞彙和表達方式的不熟悉， 就會導致在應答的時候犯了很多詞彙跟語法應用上的錯誤，在這過程中，也會伴隨著前述 的: 不間斷地停頓、錯誤的開場白、一直猶豫不決、錯誤地把某些音節的念法加長、不斷 重覆之前提過的語句、反覆使用相同的單字片語，而這些缺失狀況都是拉低各位同學的分數的關鍵。

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

同學們可以運用老師的示範例題來精進自己答題的速度和流暢性:

TOEFL Speaking Answers with Script: https://goo.gl/FRqqUs

留意示範的速度，但是自己在唸的時候不用一開始就刻意讓自己講得很快。記得你現在是在學習的階段，在過程中讓自己的速度接近最佳速率即可! 連結中的講稿也會協助各位同學習得一些有用的詞彙跟片語，這樣往後在應答的時候就可以減少自己思索關鍵字的時間 ，這才是達到高分的關鍵!

Current Events: https://goo.gl/nxWPk4

這個連結會協助各位針對時事的相關詞彙和背景知識，這當然也能幫助大家減少一些作答時的停頓。

☆☆☆☆ Pronunciation ☆☆☆☆

正確地發音是托福考試評核考生們言語表達成熟度的第二項指標，而這個標準指的是每一個音是如何被發出和聽者所感知到的每個音的發音情況，雖然托福考試並沒有預期同學們在應答時要聽起來像是母語人士，但是同學們的發音和咬字還是必須要讓母語人士能夠輕鬆地聽懂，這樣才能夠取得高分。

https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-13-13.pdf#page=20

同學們可以利用以下資源來精進自己的英文發音:

English Pronunciation 英文發音

4 part Series - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIJs8ES9xU8

L and R sounds Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVSlTyulmqY

L and R sounds Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-HDqVSK0LE

TH sound (Unvoiced) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTPfN_Q1G-I

TH sound (Voiced) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbpE6fW4jgo

-ed sound for regular past tense verbs explanation -
http://www.englishclub.com/pronunciation/-ed.htm video -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7hi-ipU2n0

Echoing 臺大史嘉琳老師--每天請聽「回音」十分鐘（上）(pp. 8-10) http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/pubs/69_hello_et.pdf

臺大史嘉琳老師--每天請聽「回音」十分鐘（下）(pp. 12-14) http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/pubs/70_hello_et.pdf

☆☆☆☆ Intonation ☆☆☆☆

精準的聲調應用是托福考試評核同學們言語表達成熟度的第三項指標，而這部分的評核又 超越音段的層級，這是甚麼意思呢？其實一般母語人士時常會就句子中某些帶有新訊息之 詞彙 (content words) 的重音節加重音調，而實際上，其他非英語系國家的第二語言學 習者也被發現到一件事，就是他們在英文發音上的音域和延展性其實又更窄而且受到更多 限制 (narrower or more compressed pitch range)，當然，這邊又要再提一次，托福考試並沒有預期同學們在應答時要聽起來像是母語人士，但是他們還是會去注意你有沒有正確地加重音調。

https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-13-13.pdf#page=21

同學們可以觀看一下這段影片來精進自己在英文口說方面的聲調應用

English Intonation:
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2bHdXcszJ4
Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh6kUsJcu3k (practice)
Part 3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k80wiT0t2rc (questions)
Part 4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLGJb63mkyA

☆☆☆☆ Intelligibility ☆☆☆☆

表達(Delivery)的最後一項評核標準就是你所應答的內容，其本身易於被聽眾所理解的程度 (intelligibility)。廣義來說就是任何一位聆聽者為了充分了解你所論述的資訊跟重 點，他所需付出的“努力程度” (degree of listener effort that was required to understand the speaker)。今天如果你言辭表達的可理解性越高，聆聽者當然就越能夠 輕鬆領會你的意思。那要如何檢測自己言辭表達理解性的高低呢？同學們只要找一位具合 格、稱職的老師，幫你就一位母語人士的觀點來了解聽者需要花多少時間或心力來徹底理 解你實際所想要表達的意思。

Delivery 評核的相關討論到此為止，以上所分享的所有資訊並非是要分散同學們自然地學習或練習英文的注意力，而主要是想藉機跟同學們分享評分委員在 口語測驗中針對每一位 考生言語表達成熟度進行評分的思維和重點是什麼而已，其他像是 Language Use (語言使用) 和 Topic Development (話題發展) 延伸等層面，將來也會進行類似的討論分享給大 家。希望各位同學還是要持續努力準備考試，也祝福各位考生如願達成高分！

評分委員評斷Delivery的流程圖: http://i.imgur.com/eSiCgm1.jpg

Sources:
https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_speaking_rubrics.pdf https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-13-13.pdf
http://arts.kmutt.ac.th/dral/PDF%20proceedings%20on%20Web/37-44_Synergy_of_Mixed_Method_Approach_to_Development_of_ESL.pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.42.9153&rep=rep1&type=pdf

雅思公開評分標準: https://www.ielts.org/PDF/UOBDs_SpeakingFinal.pdf

只從常識方面判斷吧，有三點足以證明，選舉事務處不是毫無常識，便是太監。

1. 先講「自治」這兩個字
「自治」有不同等級，「自治」這兩字不等如「完全的自治」，如把它理解成「完全的自治」，那「完全的自治」可理解為只欠「正名」之政治實體（如臺灣）甚或主權國。這樣基本法中的「高度自治」便可解釋為「高度的＋完全的自治」，即香港可能是比主權國擁有更高地位 － 帝國。（選舉事務處膽很大）

2. 公共資源自給自主：
全球不少城市，抱括中國的城市均為了食物安全和減少炭排放，都在努力提升糧食自給率，而缺乏食水之城市，例如中國的天津都興建海水化淡廠以供自已市民享用。每個城市的資源都是自給自主，這正常不過，例如東莞的公共資源便不會由齊齊哈爾來主理。如香港連公共資源都不能自給自主，即是連東莞都不如。

3. 異於中國的歷史：
自1841年起香港與北方的大清國分道揚鑣，各自發展。97前的150多年來興西方文明接軌，除了被日本佔領那3年零8個月，香港大致平穩發展，並無改朝換代。而深圳河以北之地，卻最少經歷了大清帝國、中華民國和中華人民共和國三個不同國家，其中還有無數內戰，太平天國與滿洲國的成立與消亡，軍伐割據......等，那一項與香港有「直接＊」關係或發生在香港？深圳河南北是兩個世界，這是歷史常識。

＊世上每個地域的歷史，縱使各國有異，但其軌跡總會與鄰國有部份交叠。例如香港與日本及東南亞各國的歷史交叠，日、韓與中國的歷史交叠等，但並不等同各國的歷史是無異。詳情可參考：

https://www.facebook.com/…/a.14904049878…/1553663731552442/…

【選舉事務處濫權踐踏自由，高度自治消失殆盡】

（Please refer to the later paragraphs for English version.）

立法會新界東補選六號候選人梁天琦的選舉郵件被選舉事務處指與《基本法》第一條「有根本性抵觸」，拒絕免費投寄。當中「自治」及「自主」字眼竟被列為「敏感詞」被要求刪去，而對香港歷史的事實陳述竟被指違法。本土民主前線及梁天琦強烈譴責選舉事務處侵犯《基本法》保障的言論及出版自由、妄圖以行政手段干預政治及影響選舉結果。

本土民主前線（本民前）候選人梁天琦的選舉代理人於2月15日接獲郵政署電郵通知，指選舉事務處經諮詢「法律意見」後，在截郵期限前不接納本民前於2月4日提交的選舉郵件修訂樣本，拒絕免費投寄梁天琦的選舉郵件，變相政治審查梁天琦及本民前的政治理念及政綱。本民前認為此舉無疑是宣布香港的「一國兩制」及法律所保障的言論自由、出版自由消失殆盡，踐踏梁天琦發表政見的政治權利及嚴重損害新界東選民的民主選舉權利，現將該荒謬的「敏感詞」清單羅列如下：

－「自治」被指有違《基本法》中根據 「一國兩制」的原則在香港特別行政區所實行的「高度自治」；
－「自決前途」被指違反《基本法》第一條；
－香港有「異於中國的歷史」竟被指違法；
－關於公共資源如食水、本土農業的「自主」亦被指違反《基本法》「香港特別行政區是中華人民共和國不可分離的部分。」；
－「勇武抗爭」、「以武犯禁」等本民前政治理念被指「有涉及鼓吹以武力逹到其目的之嫌」。
（全文：https://www.docdroid.net/D1cBwiP/-20160204.pdf.html）

自治自主・港人珍視
篡改歷史・令人髮指

本民前認為自治及自主，乃香港人所珍視的價值，亦受《基本法》所保障，難以理解何以成為敏感詞而不得投寄。而梁天琦政綱關於公共資源部份提及香港要「自給自主」，當中提述的海水化淡及本土農業，亦屬現時香港政府的政策，但卻被政府部門指是違法，實屬荒謬之極。

更為人詬病的是，選舉事務處自我審查，居然連香港有「異於中國的歷史」這樣的事實陳述也被列為犯禁，這種一般大眾以常理也能辨別出的篡改歷史行為令人髮指。最後，「勇武抗爭」、「以武犯禁」等並未指涉實際非法行為的政治理念，也被誣為「涉及鼓吹以武力逹到其目的」，實有以言入罪之嫌。

政府濫權・要求道歉

《基本法》第二十六條列明「香港特別行政區永久性居民依法享有選舉權和被選舉權。」，而第二十七條列明「香港居民享有言論、新聞、出版的自由，結社、集會、遊行、示威的自由，組織和參加工會、罷工的權利和自由。」，當選舉事務處以行政手段干預選舉、曲解《基本法》作出前文列出的荒謬指控時，正是對《基本法》保障的言論及出版自由的侵犯。由於在去年的區議會選舉亦曾發生類似事件，本民前及新東補選候選人梁天琦現要求選舉事務處：

1. 撤回這份不接納選舉郵件樣本的文件，並如其他候選人一樣免費投寄梁天琦的合法合理選舉郵件；
2. 停止濫權干預選舉，並向梁天琦及選民致歉；
3. 於2016年立法會換屆選舉取消對選舉郵件的政治審查。

言論自由・行動捍衛

本民前及梁天琦將一如以往，捍衛香港人的自由與權利，我們會向選舉管理委員會投訴選舉事務處的行為，且保留提出選舉呈請，甚至司法覆核的權利。為了捍衛香港人及新界東選民的知情權，我們會將上述選舉事務處的文件及未經刪改的選舉郵件文本公告天下，並印發實體版於新界東選區派發，敬請留意本民前社交網站專頁及將刊登的街站詳情。

本民前及梁天琦在此懇請所有關心香港言論及出版自由的團體及市民關注事件、積極發聲並廣傳被禁文本，否則「一國兩制」及《基本法》所保障的自由將如梁天琦選舉廣告所預言變成「一紙空文」！

* 感謝 Real Hong Kong News 提供英語譯本。

【Registration and Electoral Office abuses authority and tramples freedom, High Degree of Autonomy is left burnt and vanishes】

Leung Tin Kei Edward, No.6 candidate of 2016 Legislative Council By-election (New Territories East) has his election materials rejected from free mail by the Registration and Electoral Office (REO) for they have ‘fundamentally breached’ what is stated in the first article of the Basic Law. The terms ‘Autonomy’ and ‘Self-rule’ are listed as sensitive and urged to be deleted. The chronicle of the history of Hong Kong was also accused of contravening the law. The Hong Kong Indigenous and Leung Tin Kei Edward severely condemn REO for violating freedom of speech and of publication as protected by the Basic Law, arbitrarily manipulating politics through administrative means and thus changing the election result.

The Election Commissioner of the candidate Leung Tin Kei Edward from the Hong Kong Indigenous (HK Indigenous)received an email from Hongkong Post on Feb 15 that the election committee had reached the decision upon consulting ‘Legal Advice’ before the cut off date. It would not accept the sample of election material submitted by the HK Indigenous on Feb 4 and thus would not mail Leung’s electoral materials for free. In other words, it imposes a political censorship on Leung’s and HK Indigenous political principles and platform. HK Indigenous believes that this is in equivalence to pronouncing the diminishing and vanishing state of Hong Kong’s ‘One Country Two Systems’ and the freedom of speech and of publication protected by laws, trampling Leung’s political right in expressing his political opinions and destroying the right of electorate from New Territories East in a democratic election. Here is a list of so-called ‘sensitive terms’ claimed by REO:

- ‘Autonomy’ is said to be against the principle of ‘One Country Two System’ and ‘High Degree of Autonomy’ practiced in Hong Kong under the Basic Law;
- ‘Self-determination for our future’ is said to contravene the first article of Basic Law;
- ‘A history different from that of China’ is said to offend the law;
- ‘Self-rule’ concerning public resources of drinking water and local agriculture is said to offend the clause of ‘the Hong Kong SAR is an inalienable part of the PRC’ in Basic Law.
- Political principles of ‘militant resistance’ and ‘challenge by force’ are said to ‘allegedly induce the use of violence to achieve their aim’.
(Original link: https://www.docdroid.net/D1cBwiP/-20160204.pdf.html)

While Autonomy and Self-rule have been long cherished,
falsification of history only further infuriates

We believe that autonomy and self-rule are values that Hongkongers long cherish. As values protected by the Basic Law, it is perplexing that these terms are claimed to be ‘sensitive’ and banned from mailing. What Leung has highlighted in his platform that Hong Kong should maintain self-sufficient in terms of public resources through domestic agriculture and desalination is actually what the HKSAR Government has been promoting. Being yet considered as illegal is absolutely absurd to us.
What’s more renouncing is how REO self-censors the pamphlet and bans the factual account of ‘a history different from that of China’. As a clear falsification of history that even a normal citizen can tell, it is hard not to infuriate. Lastly, when political principles of ‘militant resistance’ and ‘challenge by force’ that relate to no actual illegal actions are also slandered to "allegedly induce the use of violence to achieve their aim”, it is hard not to believe that they aim at conviction of a person for his speech.

Demand for an apology for the government abuse of authority
Article 26 of the Basic Law states clearly that permanent residents of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall have the right to vote and the right to stand for election in accordance with law while article 27 lists that Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication; freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike.

REO manipulation to the election through administrative barriers and its absurd accusation according to its willful misinterpretation of the Basic Law are indeed infringement to the freedom of speech and of publication protected by the Basic Law. As similar incident was seen in the District Council Election last year, we, HK indigenous, and Leung Tin Kei Edward, candidate of By-election (New Territories East) now demand the REO to:

1. Withdraw this document that rejects the election mail sample and send out Leung’s legal and reasonable election materials for free in accordance with other candidates
2. Stop abusing the authority in manipulating the election and apologise to Leung and electorate
3. Lift all political censorship against election mails in the September Legislative Council Election

Action to safeguard our freedom of speech
As it has always been, we shall continue fighting for freedom and rights of Hongkongers. We shall also make a complaint to the Electoral Affairs Commission concerning the actions of REO and reserve all rights to lodge an election petition and even a judicial review. To stand up for the right to know of Hongkongers and electorate in the New Territories East, we shall make the aforementioned document and the unabridged election mail public to all. Printed version will also be available on streets in the region. Please stay tuned with our Facebook page for further information.

We sincerely hope that all citizens and organisations who are concerned with freedom of speech and publication in Hong Kong to keep an eye on the incident. We need you to voice your opinions and share the banned election materials. Otherwise, all freedoms under the Basic Law and One Country Two Systems will be nothing but unfulfilled promises as predicted in Leung’s election advertisement.

#本民前 #六號 #梁天琦 #立法會 #新東補選

繼羊羊用建國唔得，而家連自治都唔用得。一國兩制，高度自治，都係留返畀法律撚慢慢斟喇。

【選舉事務處濫權踐踏自由，高度自治消失殆盡】

（Please refer to the later paragraphs for English version.）

立法會新界東補選六號候選人梁天琦的選舉郵件被選舉事務處指與《基本法》第一條「有根本性抵觸」，拒絕免費投寄。當中「自治」及「自主」字眼竟被列為「敏感詞」被要求刪去，而對香港歷史的事實陳述竟被指違法。本土民主前線及梁天琦強烈譴責選舉事務處侵犯《基本法》保障的言論及出版自由、妄圖以行政手段干預政治及影響選舉結果。

本土民主前線（本民前）候選人梁天琦的選舉代理人於2月15日接獲郵政署電郵通知，指選舉事務處經諮詢「法律意見」後，在截郵期限前不接納本民前於2月4日提交的選舉郵件修訂樣本，拒絕免費投寄梁天琦的選舉郵件，變相政治審查梁天琦及本民前的政治理念及政綱。本民前認為此舉無疑是宣布香港的「一國兩制」及法律所保障的言論自由、出版自由消失殆盡，踐踏梁天琦發表政見的政治權利及嚴重損害新界東選民的民主選舉權利，現將該荒謬的「敏感詞」清單羅列如下：

－「自治」被指有違《基本法》中根據 「一國兩制」的原則在香港特別行政區所實行的「高度自治」；
－「自決前途」被指違反《基本法》第一條；
－香港有「異於中國的歷史」竟被指違法；
－關於公共資源如食水、本土農業的「自主」亦被指違反《基本法》「香港特別行政區是中華人民共和國不可分離的部分。」；
－「勇武抗爭」、「以武犯禁」等本民前政治理念被指「有涉及鼓吹以武力逹到其目的之嫌」。
（全文：https://www.docdroid.net/D1cBwiP/-20160204.pdf.html）

自治自主・港人珍視
篡改歷史・令人髮指

本民前認為自治及自主，乃香港人所珍視的價值，亦受《基本法》所保障，難以理解何以成為敏感詞而不得投寄。而梁天琦政綱關於公共資源部份提及香港要「自給自主」，當中提述的海水化淡及本土農業，亦屬現時香港政府的政策，但卻被政府部門指是違法，實屬荒謬之極。

更為人詬病的是，選舉事務處自我審查，居然連香港有「異於中國的歷史」這樣的事實陳述也被列為犯禁，這種一般大眾以常理也能辨別出的篡改歷史行為令人髮指。最後，「勇武抗爭」、「以武犯禁」等並未指涉實際非法行為的政治理念，也被誣為「涉及鼓吹以武力逹到其目的」，實有以言入罪之嫌。

政府濫權・要求道歉

《基本法》第二十六條列明「香港特別行政區永久性居民依法享有選舉權和被選舉權。」，而第二十七條列明「香港居民享有言論、新聞、出版的自由，結社、集會、遊行、示威的自由，組織和參加工會、罷工的權利和自由。」，當選舉事務處以行政手段干預選舉、曲解《基本法》作出前文列出的荒謬指控時，正是對《基本法》保障的言論及出版自由的侵犯。由於在去年的區議會選舉亦曾發生類似事件，本民前及新東補選候選人梁天琦現要求選舉事務處：

1. 撤回這份不接納選舉郵件樣本的文件，並如其他候選人一樣免費投寄梁天琦的合法合理選舉郵件；
2. 停止濫權干預選舉，並向梁天琦及選民致歉；
3. 於2016年立法會換屆選舉取消對選舉郵件的政治審查。

言論自由・行動捍衛

本民前及梁天琦將一如以往，捍衛香港人的自由與權利，我們會向選舉管理委員會投訴選舉事務處的行為，且保留提出選舉呈請，甚至司法覆核的權利。為了捍衛香港人及新界東選民的知情權，我們會將上述選舉事務處的文件及未經刪改的選舉郵件文本公告天下，並印發實體版於新界東選區派發，敬請留意本民前社交網站專頁及將刊登的街站詳情。

本民前及梁天琦在此懇請所有關心香港言論及出版自由的團體及市民關注事件、積極發聲並廣傳被禁文本，否則「一國兩制」及《基本法》所保障的自由將如梁天琦選舉廣告所預言變成「一紙空文」！

* 感謝 Real Hong Kong News 提供英語譯本。

【Registration and Electoral Office abuses authority and tramples freedom, High Degree of Autonomy is left burnt and vanishes】

Leung Tin Kei Edward, No.6 candidate of 2016 Legislative Council By-election (New Territories East) has his election materials rejected from free mail by the Registration and Electoral Office (REO) for they have ‘fundamentally breached’ what is stated in the first article of the Basic Law. The terms ‘Autonomy’ and ‘Self-rule’ are listed as sensitive and urged to be deleted. The chronicle of the history of Hong Kong was also accused of contravening the law. The Hong Kong Indigenous and Leung Tin Kei Edward severely condemn REO for violating freedom of speech and of publication as protected by the Basic Law, arbitrarily manipulating politics through administrative means and thus changing the election result.

The Election Commissioner of the candidate Leung Tin Kei Edward from the Hong Kong Indigenous (HK Indigenous)received an email from Hongkong Post on Feb 15 that the election committee had reached the decision upon consulting ‘Legal Advice’ before the cut off date. It would not accept the sample of election material submitted by the HK Indigenous on Feb 4 and thus would not mail Leung’s electoral materials for free. In other words, it imposes a political censorship on Leung’s and HK Indigenous political principles and platform. HK Indigenous believes that this is in equivalence to pronouncing the diminishing and vanishing state of Hong Kong’s ‘One Country Two Systems’ and the freedom of speech and of publication protected by laws, trampling Leung’s political right in expressing his political opinions and destroying the right of electorate from New Territories East in a democratic election. Here is a list of so-called ‘sensitive terms’ claimed by REO:

- ‘Autonomy’ is said to be against the principle of ‘One Country Two System’ and ‘High Degree of Autonomy’ practiced in Hong Kong under the Basic Law;
- ‘Self-determination for our future’ is said to contravene the first article of Basic Law;
- ‘A history different from that of China’ is said to offend the law;
- ‘Self-rule’ concerning public resources of drinking water and local agriculture is said to offend the clause of ‘the Hong Kong SAR is an inalienable part of the PRC’ in Basic Law.
- Political principles of ‘militant resistance’ and ‘challenge by force’ are said to ‘allegedly induce the use of violence to achieve their aim’.
(Original link: https://www.docdroid.net/D1cBwiP/-20160204.pdf.html)

While Autonomy and Self-rule have been long cherished,
falsification of history only further infuriates

We believe that autonomy and self-rule are values that Hongkongers long cherish. As values protected by the Basic Law, it is perplexing that these terms are claimed to be ‘sensitive’ and banned from mailing. What Leung has highlighted in his platform that Hong Kong should maintain self-sufficient in terms of public resources through domestic agriculture and desalination is actually what the HKSAR Government has been promoting. Being yet considered as illegal is absolutely absurd to us.
What’s more renouncing is how REO self-censors the pamphlet and bans the factual account of ‘a history different from that of China’. As a clear falsification of history that even a normal citizen can tell, it is hard not to infuriate. Lastly, when political principles of ‘militant resistance’ and ‘challenge by force’ that relate to no actual illegal actions are also slandered to "allegedly induce the use of violence to achieve their aim”, it is hard not to believe that they aim at conviction of a person for his speech.

Demand for an apology for the government abuse of authority
Article 26 of the Basic Law states clearly that permanent residents of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall have the right to vote and the right to stand for election in accordance with law while article 27 lists that Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication; freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike.

REO manipulation to the election through administrative barriers and its absurd accusation according to its willful misinterpretation of the Basic Law are indeed infringement to the freedom of speech and of publication protected by the Basic Law. As similar incident was seen in the District Council Election last year, we, HK indigenous, and Leung Tin Kei Edward, candidate of By-election (New Territories East) now demand the REO to:

1. Withdraw this document that rejects the election mail sample and send out Leung’s legal and reasonable election materials for free in accordance with other candidates
2. Stop abusing the authority in manipulating the election and apologise to Leung and electorate
3. Lift all political censorship against election mails in the September Legislative Council Election

Action to safeguard our freedom of speech
As it has always been, we shall continue fighting for freedom and rights of Hongkongers. We shall also make a complaint to the Electoral Affairs Commission concerning the actions of REO and reserve all rights to lodge an election petition and even a judicial review. To stand up for the right to know of Hongkongers and electorate in the New Territories East, we shall make the aforementioned document and the unabridged election mail public to all. Printed version will also be available on streets in the region. Please stay tuned with our Facebook page for further information.

We sincerely hope that all citizens and organisations who are concerned with freedom of speech and publication in Hong Kong to keep an eye on the incident. We need you to voice your opinions and share the banned election materials. Otherwise, all freedoms under the Basic Law and One Country Two Systems will be nothing but unfulfilled promises as predicted in Leung’s election advertisement.

#本民前 #六號 #梁天琦 #立法會 #新東補選