採訪/易如 編輯/陳潔 後製/舒燦
Lawyer: The Injunctions Issued by the High Court of Hong Kong Are Unnecessary
The first dialogue between the Hong Kong Federation
of Students (HKFS) and the SAR Government was held
on the evening of Oct. 21.
On the eve of the dialogue, the High Court of Hong Kong
issued a couple of injunctions to prohibit protesters
from occupying the streets.
In this regard, The HKFS said that it would respect the court
ruling, but it would not take the initiative to evacuate.
Some lawyers said that the High Court injunctions
are actually redundant.
As there have been clashes in the occupied Mong Kok area
recently, people from all walks of life hoped that the dialogue
between the government and the HKFS on Oct. 21
could break the deadlocks.
However, the High Court turned out to issue three injunctions
on Oct. 20.
The three plaintiffs of these cases are Chiu Luen Public Light
Bus Company Limited, the Hong Kong Taxi Association
member Li Haiping, the Taxi Drivers & Operators
Association member Tam Chun-hung, and CITIC Tower
owners Kim Peng Investment Co. respectively.
The Chiu Luen Bus Company and two representatives
from the Taxi Associations requested the court
to ban protesters from continuing occupying the streets
around Argyle Street and Nathan Road in Mong Kok.
Mr. Benjamin Yu, the lawyer representing CITIC Tower
owners Kim Peng Investment Co. said the roadblocks
in Lung Wui Road and Tim Mei Avenue in front
of the CITIC Tower have blocked the building＇s parking lot
and two fire emergency entrances over the past few days,
leading to the scenario that someone was trapped inside
for 45 minutes.
The judge ultimately approved the applications
and issued injunctions.
The judge said the protesters＇ deeds have been exceeding
reasonable degrees, and that regardless of how noble
their ideas are, no one can completely disregard
the rights of others.
However, Hong Kong Legislative Council member
Leung Kwok-hung said that to solve related problems
by injunctions cannot be justified.
Leung Kwok-hung: “As the area occupied by us at present
is the place where police can exert their public power,
there is no need to solve this problem with injunctions.
This is the problem resulting from
the government’s dereliction.
So, it＇s improper for individuals to apply
for the issuance of injunctions.
As long as a problem can be solved by public power,
it should be done so.
The rule of law should not become a means to solve
political problems for individuals."
US-based Chinese social issues researcher Zhang Jian holds
that the Hong Kong High Court has abused judicial power.
Zhang Jian: “I think everyone who participated in the Occupy
Central movement should know that it may not be so good
to occupy Central.
But the direct cause is that the Chinese regime overturned
their promise of “one country, two system.”
Hong Kong courts should come forward at this time to make
a judicial decision on the Chinese regime, as opposed
to simply using the legal system to restrain and suppress
Hong Kong people＇s voice for freedom."
According to Hong Kong Ming Pao Daily News,
lawyer Vitus Leung said since the current occupation
movement is unlawful assembly, it is, in fact, redundant
to implement injunctions on illegal behaviors.
He predicted that the injunctions would not be able
to have the intended effect of clearance.
Faced with the court injunctions, many people participating
in the movement said that they would continue to go ahead
with the occupation to strive for democracy.
Scholarism student leader Joshua Wong noted that he would
not urge protesters to evacuate the streets,
but he hoped that they could take into account
the legal consequences.
He stressed that this is a civil disobedience movement,
and he would turn himself into the police
after the movement is over.
Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying said on the morning
of Oct. 21, as the court has issued the injunctions, he hoped
that those who occupied the streets should be prepared
to face possible criminal liability for contempt of court.
Democratic Party Legislative Council member,
Albert Ho Chun-yan, who practices law,
said that the public may walk away and refuse to accept
the injunctions in order to avoid the risks.
He also reminded the public that anyone can ask the court
to revoke the injunctions, or narrow their scope.
If someone raises the case, he can provide the assists
to deal with the matter.
Besides, Leung Chun-ying was interviewed
by three American media outlets on the evening of Oct. 20.
He said that the challenges against him or SAR government
would not be good to any party or Hong Kong’s autonomy.
He also reiterated the allegation that the occupation
movement has been intervened by foreign forces.
He noted that it＇s not simply hearsay, but he didn＇t disclose
who the alleged foreign forces are.
Leung Kwok-hung: “If he felt that the so-called foreign forces
have done something illegal, he may as well arrest them.
Otherwise, he shouldn＇t slander Hong Kong people
and defame our movement without evidence.
This is a very serious accusation."
Zhang Jian: “In terms of those who stand by the Chinese
regime, when our nationals＇ voice for democracy transforms
into a spontaneous protest, the Region＇s head would use
the allegation of foreign forces to intimidate the people.
In fact, we have noticed that during this movement,
Western countries such as the U.S. and the U.K.
have been afraid of being accused by the Chinese regime
of excessive involvement in the movement.
They thus take a sidelines attitude toward this incident,
but it is still being universally condemned."
Zhang Jian pointed out that the SAR government has
repeatedly resorted to violence and referred
to the Occupy Central protests as illegal activities.
The government was forced with outside pressure to proceed
with the dialogue, without any sincerity.
He believes that the ultimate outcome of the negotiations
would be an outright failure.
Interview/ YiRuEdit/ ChenJie Post-Production/ ShuCan