[時事討論] 劉夢熊出格與詹培忠割席 艾自由

felicity2010

劉夢熊出格與詹培忠割席  艾自由1 c9 y( l7 y$ o0 Q/ j; |2 N+ c
" f" |. J- W% z7 P* W7 R
以往被視為「緊跟中央路線」的全國政協劉夢熊,近日在「結石寶寶之父」趙連海案的表現,在本地芸芸親京派政壇人士中可謂異常「出格」。他先是在報章發表題為〈非法之法　無罪的罪〉的聲明,擲地有聲地譴責北京大興區法院的裁決;在趙連海已獲受理「保外就醫」後,又堅持上書中央領導人要求啟動司法改革。但他這一連串舉動,卻招來其多年來的股壇「戰友」、立法會金融界議員詹培忠,在報章刊登與他「割席」的聲明。公仔箱論壇' F7 \" ?6 L) R) ~

9 Z2 d( h7 R7 i4 ~# }令人想起廖瑤珠坊間有政壇耳語揣測,劉夢熊是因為在多年來一直勇於為北京「護航」,最後卻僅獲特區政府頒發銅紫荊星章,覺得勳章級別不夠高而「翻臉」。筆者從來不喜歡從陰謀論或動機論,去揣測某人的行為是否「別有用心」。就眼前所看到的,劉這次是做了符合公平正義的事情,其最近的「勇猛」表現,也不禁令人想起已故的全國人大代表廖瑤珠。tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb6 b, m) j* ?3 Y9 W' S9 Z

0 d. }, D% ?( E4 T% U4 D/ m- F: z' p3 G在一九九七年病逝未能見證香港回歸的廖瑤珠,當年曾在一次全國人大會議的分組公開會議期間,即席提出一眾代表為六四事件死難者默哀,頓時令身旁眾人不知所措,她也成為場內默哀的諤諤一士。而在趙連海案近日在港鬧得沸沸揚揚之際,劉夢熊日前出席電台節目時,就曾強調自己並不同意港區人大和政協的聯署信要求「寬大」處理案件,因為「趙連海根本沒有罪,何以談寬大處理」?
$ v4 C! i' i; I4 y& B5.39.217.77:88987 j( G' L' v2 H* b) F; \/ b  _
劉夢熊又說,出任政協委員是「責任重於榮譽,是其是非其非」,也承諾在明年三月的「兩會」跟進趙連海事件。如果港區的代表委員,在其他議題上都像劉夢熊這次般獨立思考而非處處唯唯諾諾,反映香港的主流民意,本地親京派的印象將可大為提升。
8 o9 ?4 k5 N- B; C# w, j' p1 {tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb5.39.217.77:88989 O" }+ q9 l  S* d% Z
功組議員逆民情
5 l* a7 d- w7 n$ C& Z公仔箱論壇另一方面,「金牌莊家」詹培忠竟然指有人利用職銜借趙連海案「譁眾取寵」,更指因此要與劉夢熊「劃清限界,從此割席」。當日在立法會內反對促請北京當局釋放趙連海的議員,就只有他和代表旅遊界的謝偉俊。只有幾百名選民的「迷你」功能界別,選出的議員如斯脫離民情,由此也可見一斑。

felicity2010

We are not talking about some lofty ideas of democracy. It is the judicial system governing the life of every individual in the country we are referring to. Some say the end is important, 趙連海 would be released (on health reason due to leniency of the government) but I consider the means is more important. Only with an independent and transparent judicial system, people like 趙連海 would undergo a proper legal proceeding. Any trumped up charges or accusations without ground would be thrown out of courts. Only when such system is established then everyone would be equal before the law and under its protection. Otherwise, similar cases would keep coming. However the party's influence pervades every level of the system, from the appointment of the judges to the registration of the lawyers. The verdicts are based on political reasons more than anything else. It is not the lack of laws in China but it is the lack of the will to carry them out. The interpretation of the laws rests solely on the party and a formidable tool it becomes. I know perfectly the day of an independent judicial system is nowhere in sight and it is an impossible dream. How can those with vested interest in the system would make changes to something they reap benefit from in the first place!

felicity2010

" J  j  _- h/ |& P* ^* XTVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。
& X) g4 j' C7 q$ m+ Q* \

6# felicity2010 tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb: C; N; z" N$ T* H3 ?/ J! y
“北京市大興區人民法院經審理認定，趙連海無視國法，糾集多人在公共場所起鬨鬧事，造成公共秩序嚴重混亂，犯罪事實清楚，證據確實、充分，其行為已構成尋釁滋事罪，而北京市大興區人民法院根據趙 ...公仔箱論壇- _' O5 B+ Q) S  V3 t( n' _1 P! g
大啦叭 發表於 2010-11-27 07:09 AM

is the only official version that is allowed to circulate. In the beginning of  this man-made tragedy, 溫家寶 had apologized personally to the victims and their families, he promised help. But after the heat of this event died down, with the official declaration that all the babies were cured, kidney stones smaller than a size were not considered as a health hazard. Doctors changed their diagnoses accordingly and help was as elusive as ever.  趙連海 tried to organize an appeal, still naively trusting the system. That becomes "趙連海一案本来是民間索賠事件，但越演越烈。"
( z: y* \1 l+ K9 b7 KThere bounds to have loopholes and injustices in any law. With an open system, there would be amendments to better the judicial system. However, the judicial system in China is far from being transparent, how can we make changes for the better if we don't know where the problems are. 趙連海 and his lawyers had known the outcome of the trial even before the trial began. They live under the system and understand exactly the meaning of “杀雞警猴”.