編輯:收到之鋒單獨隔離囚禁期間寫下的來信。他現已結束隔離囚禁,狀態尚好。之鋒在鐵窗之內最為掛心12港人已經送中超過100天,並希望香港人繼續聲援所有失去自由的手足。
《監獄中的監獄》(Please scroll for English version)
在11月23日不幸遭法官在未作判刑前,便宣布即時還柙後,我本來已有意在patreon發表獄中書簡,跟關心我的朋友述說再度入獄的想法。結果卻因當晚突然被單獨囚禁的狀況而大失預算。即便已有三次坐監的經驗,但被送到「監獄中的監獄」囚禁,實在是始料不及。我花了不少時間與精神,方能驅使自己平伏下來整理思緒,過程實在不是容易。
還柙首天,我被送到去年六月才步出的荔枝角收押所,然後進行不陌生的入冊程序 —— 見長官、換囚衣和領取個人用品等。本來我已對這些程序諷刺地感到熟悉,但到了下午四時左右,當我跟林朗彥相繼完成初到荔枝角收柙所的各項程序並呆坐於指模房一角等侯指示時,保安組職員突然將我帶往收押所醫院。我本來以為在獄中見醫生是基於程序需要,結果卻被帶到收押所醫院走廊盡頭的單人囚室,那刻我才深知不妙,也成了惡夢真正的開端。
到達單人囚室後,懲教人員表示我需要等待長官前來講解狀況,並拋下一句「你之後應該都喺到」便離開。等待過程中我感到非常不安,不斷猜想懲教會搬出甚麼原因來把我隔離囚禁於單人囚室。結果千算萬算也算不到,懲教表示我的X光片有不妥——懷疑我肚內藏有異物,諸如毒品、戒指或金銀器等,故此我需要接受為期數天的隔離囚禁。
之前三次入獄也有照過X-ray,自問從來跟毒品二字完全沾不上邊,而還柙前的三餐也是正常食物,對於這個奇怪結果完全摸不着頭腦。另外,因為懲教院方並不允許在囚人士檢查X光片,即沒有途徑和渠道查證,所以對於這個檢查結果更是無從稽考。
因被懷疑體內藏有毒品而在醫院隔離囚禁,囚禁的待遇比起「水飯房」還要不堪。一般而言,還柙侯判的在囚人士於日間均會在有三至四十人的活動室打發時間,而晚上則回到五人囚室休息。惟我被隔離囚禁期間,除了探訪和洗澡以外,基本上是半步都不能踏出這個七十多呎的囚室,不能「放風」亦連一小時户外活動的時間也不被允許。由於整項隔離措施是應對在囚人士體內藏有毒品為前提,所以懲教職員每隔四小時便會來量我的血壓及檢查血含氧量。除了凌晨一時及四時也需起床作檢查外,囚室也是二十四小時開着燈的,所以我需要把CSI口罩當眼罩使用,才能勉強入睡。
最難捱的是,由於整個隔離囚禁的原意是希望體內藏有毒品人士將毒品排出體外,所以我並不能使用囚室的馬桶,而水龍頭也不會有水,以杜絕在囚人士將毒品沖走的可能。取而代之的,就是院所提供的塑膠便盤。但因為便盤的更換次數不足,我只能在洗手盆如廁小解。在囚人士排泄於便盤後,需知會懲教署保安組前來囚室,仔細檢查排泄物有否藏有藥丸或毒品之類的異物。當檢查程序完畢後,職員便會要求在囚人士在一張「單獨觀察」的紙張上簽名作實。我仍然歷歷在目每次簽署時看到紙張清楚列明「懷疑在囚人士體內藏有毒品」一欄,感覺實在很不好受。
據聞隔離囚禁一般為期三至五日,而今天已是正式被單獨囚禁的第二天。但願此信寄出及發佈的時候,我已結束隔離。在還未能適應及消化自己已身處監獄裏的事實,就被送往單獨囚禁,斷絕了一切活動及溝通,的確不好捱,情緒亦難免受到牽動。故此,抱歉我暫未能在大政治和社會環境的層面提供什麼分析,但我知道還有很多手足正在面臨官司,或和我一樣身陷囹圄,還望大家繼續有幾多做幾多,讓他們知道自己不是孤身一人。下周一(30日)是12港人被捕送中100天的日子,亦懇請大家繼續關注。
最後想說,面對未知的官司刑期及種種不確定性,必須坦誠地說會有不安及焦慮,但正如我再步入犯人欄時說到「大家頂住,我知道外面嘅人更加辛苦,繼續努力。」,我也會學習把獄中遭遇的苦難轉化為驅使自己成長的果實。我知道絕不容易,但我會努力頂住,共勉之。
之鋒
25/11/2020
The prison inside prison
After my immediate remand on November 23, I had intended to send letters from the prison to update you my latest situation in jail after my remand on November 23. But owing to the sudden solitary confinement that night, it turned out that I was unable to do so. Although I have been in prison three times, being held in the prison isolation unit is far beyond my expectation. It took me a lot of time and energy to calm myself down and reorganise my thoughts.
On the first day of remand in Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre, I went through the registration procedures—meeting with officers, changing into prison clothes and obtaining daily necessities. The procedures are very familiar as I was released from here in June. At about 4 pm, Ivan Lam and I completed all procedures and waiting for further instructions in the fingerprinting room, officers from the security team suddenly took me to the hospital in the Centre. While I thought it was a normal procedure to see doctor, I was taken to a single cell at the end of the hospital corridor. At that moment, I knew it was the beginning of the nightmare.
After arriving the single cell, the correctional officer told me that I needed to wait for a senior officer to explain the situation and said, "You should be here for a while." During waiting for the senior officer, I felt very disturbed and kept wondering why they moved me to solitary confinement. In the end, the senior provided a highly unexpected reason—there were "foreign objects" in my stomach, the officer said, they could be drugs, rings or gold and silver objects. Therefore, I needed to be in solitary confinement for several days until they found out what the "foreign objects" were.
I have taken X-rays for a few times, but nothing happened before, I was completely confused about the X-rays result. I have never had anything to do with drugs, and all food I had before remand were normal food. Moreover, under the current policy, the prison administration does not allow inmates to see their X-rays, so there is no way to verify the results.
As the officers suspected I possess drugs in my body, the treatment was even worse than normal solitary confinement. Generally speaking, persons in remand can spend their time in the activity room with three to forty other inmates in the daytime and return to their five-personal cell at night. However, what happened to me was, apart from visiting by my friends and relatives and taking a shower, I basically could not leave the single cell. I was even not allowed to have one hour of outdoor activity. Since the isolation was based on the presumption of possession of drugs, correctional officers would check my blood pressure and oxygen saturation every four hours even at midnight. The light in the cell was also kept turning on 24 hours a day, so I needed to use my face mask as the blindfold to barely put myself to sleep.
The most difficult thing was that since the original intent of the entire confinement was to let persons excrete drugs from their body, so I could not use the toilet in the cell, and the tap did not have water to prevent people from flushing drugs away. Instead, officers would provide a plastic plate. But because of the lack of replacement of the toilet plate, I could only use the washbasin to urinate. After the I excreted in the plate, I needed to inform the officer to come to the cell and check the excrement for any foreign objects such as pills or drugs. When the process was completed, the officers would ask me to sign an "isolated observation" form. I still remembered the uncomfortable feeling when I saw the form clearly stated "suspected possession of drugs in the inmate's body" every time I signed the paper.
To my understanding, such solitary confinement generally lasts three to five days, and today is the second day of formal solitary confinement. I hope that when this letter is sent and published, the isolation is ended. Before I could adapt the fact that I was already in prison, I was sent to solitary confinement and all activities and communication were cut off. It was indeed difficult to endure, and I am sorry that I have not yet provided any analysis of the politics and social environment. But I know that there are still many other Hong Kong protesters who are facing lawsuits or are in jail like me. I hope you can continue to do as much as you can to let them know they are not alone. Monday (November 30) is the day when 12 Hongkongers were arrested and sent to Mainland China for 100 days, I urge everyone to continue to pay attention to them.
Finally, I want to be frank that, in the face of uncertainties, I just feel uneasy and anxious. However, as I said when I stepped into the dock in the courtroom, "Hang in everyone, I know the situation that the people outside face will be more difficult. Keep fighting." I will also learn to turn the pains and sufferings I encountered in prison into the power that drives my growth. I know it will never be easy, but I will try my best.
Joshua
25/11/2020
__________________________________________
【寫信給之鋒、周庭、Ivan:寫信師注意事項】
鐵窗之內,一紙書信就是最大的支持。各位同路人如欲寫信給之鋒、周庭或Ivan,可郵寄至「香港九龍中央郵政局郵政信箱73962號」(信封毋須註明姓名),三位的朋友會彙整信件並代為轉交,謝謝!
寫信師注意事項
內容篇
✅分享生活點滴
✅分享最近時事
❌透露個人資料
❌提及發夢經歷
❌有關逃獄的資訊
⭐️懲教署會預先審查書信,各位寫信師記得好好保護個人私隱
格式篇
❌賀咭、硬咭紙、立體信紙
⭐️懲教署規定每位還押人士最多只能收取30張賀咭,多出的賀咭會被放入私人物品箱並丟棄
❌附有閃亮效果的墨水
❌附加任何裝飾,如立體信紙、貼紙、閃粉
❌附加任何物品,如書籤
⭐️懲教署會扣起不合規格的書信
.................
💪涓滴支持,不勝感激,請訂閱黃之鋒Pateron:https://bit.ly/joshuawonghk
╭────────────────╮
╞🌐https://twitter.com/joshuawongcf
╞📷https://www.instagram.com/joshua1013
╞📧joshua@joshuawongcf.com
╞💬https://t.me/joshuawonghk
╰────────────────╯
同時也有2部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過29萬的網紅852郵報,也在其Youtube影片中提到,立即贊助《852郵報》: http://www.post852.com/support-us/ 852郵報 http://www.post852.com...
presumption 在 潘小濤 Facebook 八卦
法律界人士的解讀
沒有最壞,只有更壞。港區國安法的法律文本比我所預想最差的情況還要差。以下我嘗試總括幾個重點:
A. 法律文本充滿國內社會主義法制的特色,與香港普通法的精神及法律語言大相逕庭。
B. 將具中國特色的法治概念套用至香港。法律一方面強調國家機構及人員須遵守法律、保障人權(第50條),但實際上他們不會受特區的管轄或獨立法院的有效監察(第60條)。例如駐港國安機構人員在收集情報時,可以在不受《截取通訊及監察條例》規管的情況下截取通訊。此舉有別於香港一貫行之有效的法治精神,即公權者須受獨立法院監管。
C. 超越了國內域外管轄權只適用於中國公民的概念,任何人(包括非香港永久性居民)在香港以外的行為,只要觸犯港區國安法,同屬違法,只要該人踏足香港境內,即有可能被遞捕及檢控(第36-38條)。
(溫馨提示:全世界80億人應該熟讀港區國安法,以免誤墮法網,追悔莫及。)
個別條文分析:
《第一章 總則》
第一條. 法例並沒有就國家安全再作定義,表示國家安全的定義將採用2015年頒布的《中華人民共和國國家安全法》的定義,涵蓋範圍包括傳統的國土安全、軍事安全,以及非傳統的政治安全、文化安全、科技安全等等,包羅萬有。
第四條. 提出維護國家安全應當尊重及保障人權,但由於國安法的解釋權屬人大常委會而非香港法院,所以是否違反人權將交由人大常委會審視及決定。
《第二章》
第一節 職責
第十條. 要求特區政府通過學校、媒體等開展國家安全教育。不知道日後莘莘學子是否需要熟讀及明白為何諾貝爾獎得主劉曉波、維權律師余文生、秦永敏、王全璋等人的行為會顛覆國家政權、危害國家安全呢?。
第二節 機構
第十四條. 香港特別行政區維護國家安全委員會的工作將(1)不受任何特區機構、組織的干涉(即包括立法會、申訴專員公署等)、(2)無須公開,及(3)不受司法覆核(即不受法院監察)。有別於一貫法治社會要求公權者須受獨立法院監管的精神。
第十九條. 維護國家安全委員會的開支不受立法會審批,而經由行政長官直接批准,偏離以往公共財政須由立法會批准的慣例。
《第三章 罪行和處罰》
第一節 分裂國家罪
第二十條. 不論是否使用武力或以武力相威脅,只要行為被視為旨在分裂國家或破壞國家統一,即屬犯法。國際人權標準一般要求行為必須包括使用武力或武力威脅,才會構成分裂國家,以保障言論自由及和平集會等權利。
第二節 顛覆國家政權罪
第二十二條. 顛覆國家政權行為包括使用任何非法手段,範圍可以非常廣闊,例如組織未經批准的集會,若被視為嚴重干擾、阻撓特區政府依法履行職能,亦有可能違反港區國安法。
第三節 恐怖活動罪
第二十四條. 恐怖活動定義非常廣泛,只要是為實現政治主張組織不同的非法行動,也可被視為恐怖活動,例如破壞交通工具、以黑客攻擊政府網絡等。
第四節 勾結外國或者境外勢力危害國家安全罪
第二十九條. 只要向外國組織提供“涉及國家安全的機密或情報”,即屬違法,而參考程翔及明報記者席揚案,國家對於涉及國家機密的定義十分廣泛。
第五節 其他處罰規定
第三十五條,任何人被判決觸犯危害國家安全罪行(不論是否情節嚴重亦不論是否主要犯罪者),便會被終身褫奪參選立法會、區議會或出任任何公職的資格。
第六節 效力範圍
第三十六至三十八條. 超越了國內域外管轄權只適用於中國公民的概念,任何人(包括非香港永久性居民)在香港以外的行為,只要觸犯港區國安法,同屬違法,只要該人踏足香港境內,即有可能被遞捕及檢控。
《第四章 案件管轄、法律適用和程序》
第四十二條. 在港區國安法下,除非法官有充分理由相信有關人士不會再犯,否則不予保釋。此舉偏離現行制度,即除非法官有充分理由相信有關人士有機會再犯、棄保潛逃等,否則應予保釋(presumption in favour of bail)。
第四十四條. 根據現行機制,行政長官須按照獨立的司法人員推薦委員會的建議,委任法官。換言之,行政長官的委任權屬禮節性。但港區國安法下,行政長官的委任權卻屬實質性及不受約束。過程中,行政長官可以諮詢維護國家安全委員會及終審法院首席法官的意見,但沒有規定必須諮詢,或諮詢後須採納有關意見,而由於維護國家安全委員會可以給予意見,無法避免該委員會不會對法官進行政治或忠誠度審查。
第四十七條, 香港法院在審理案件時不能自行根據證據及法律決定有關行為是否涉及國家安全或者有關證據是否涉及國家機密,而需要取得行政長官就該等問題發出的證明書,而證明書對法院有約束力。換言之,究竟一個人所作的行為是否涉及國家安全或有關證據是否涉及國家秘密由行政長官一錘定音作決定。
《第五章》
第六十條. 國家安全人員不受香港法院管轄。
《第六章 附則》
第六十五條. 本法的解釋權屬於人大常委會,有別於《基本法》的158條,並沒有賦予香港法院自行解釋港區國安法的權利。
presumption 在 Claudia Mo/毛孟靜 Facebook 八卦
#港版國安法 終於有司法翹楚出來講實話
#BeijingSecurityLaw Finally judicial bigwig, ex-Chief Justice Andrew Li, on how judicial independence could be hit
Statement/聲明原文:
//It is unfortunate that the draft law has not yet been published. But it is significant to note that the explanation of the Legislative Affairs Commission of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee has stated that the legal principles of our system would be followed, including the presumption of innocence. There is no suggestion that the law would be retrospective.
I would wish to comment on two matters affecting the judiciary. First, it was stated that the chief executive would have the power to select judges who would deal with national security cases. This would be detrimental to the independence of the judiciary.
Under the Basic Law, judges are appointed by the chief executive on the recommendation of an independent commission, that is, the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission. Judges are chosen on the basis of their professional qualities and they exercise their judicial power independently, free from any interference.
The judiciary is independent from the executive authorities. The independent judiciary should decide on the judges who would hear these cases without any interference from the executive authorities.
Further, the chief executive would not have the required knowledge of the experience and expertise of judges to make the selection on his or her own. Also, the chief executive’s chairmanship of the National Security Commission to be established in Hong Kong would make it inappropriate for him or her to make the choice on his or her own.
If this view is not acceptable, then the arrangement should at least provide that the chief executive’s selection of these judges must be based on the recommendation of the chief justice or that of the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission. This would ensure that the choice will be made on a professional and independent basis.
Secondly, the explanation stated that under specific circumstances, the central authorities may exercise jurisdiction over a small number of criminal cases that jeopardise national security. This also raises serious concern.
When exercised, these cases will be dealt with and tried in mainland China. The defendant will not enjoy the safeguards of our judicial process. Although it is said that this jurisdiction could only be exercised in the most exceptional circumstances, it would undermine the independent judicial power which our courts are authorised to exercise under the Basic Law.//
presumption 在 852郵報 Youtube 的評價
立即贊助《852郵報》:
http://www.post852.com/support-us/
852郵報
http://www.post852.com
presumption 在 852郵報 Youtube 的評價
立即贊助《852郵報》:
http://www.post852.com/support-us/
852郵報
http://www.post852.com
presumption 在 Presumption Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster 的相關結果
English Language Learners Definition of presumption · a belief that something is true even though it has not been proved · an act of accepting that something is ... ... <看更多>
presumption 在 presumption - Yahoo奇摩字典搜尋結果 的相關結果
presumption · 查看更多. KK[prɪˋzʌmpʃən]; DJ[priˋzʌmpʃən]. 美式. n. 冒昧;放肆;自以為是;傲慢[U];推測;假定,設想[C][U][+(that)] ... ... <看更多>
presumption 在 presumption中文(繁體)翻譯:劍橋詞典 的相關結果
The presumption of innocence is central to American law. 美國法律的核心是無罪假定。 There is no scientific evidence to support such presumptions. 並無科學依據 ... ... <看更多>