關於 test paper free ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

經濟學人的封面，圖片是龍的嘴咬向香港，爪子伸向台灣

中國在香港用恐懼來統治
全世界應該感到擔憂

https://www.economist.com/…/china-has-launched-rule-by-fear…

Dragon strike
China has launched rule by fear in Hong Kong
The rest of the world should worry, too

The people of Hong Kong want two things: to choose how they are governed, and to be subject to the rule of law. The Chinese Communist Party finds both ideas so frightening that many expected it to send troops to crush last year’s vast protests in Hong Kong. Instead, it bided its time. Now, with the world distracted by covid-19 and mass protests difficult because of social distancing, it has chosen a quieter way to show who’s boss. That threatens a broader reckoning with the world—and not just over Hong Kong, but also over the South China Sea and Taiwan.

On May 21st China declared, in effect, that Hong Kongers deemed to pose a threat to the party will become subject to the party’s wrath. A new security law, written in Beijing, will create still-to-be defined crimes of subversion and secession, terms used elsewhere in China to lock up dissidents, including Uighurs and Tibetans. Hong Kong will have no say in drafting the law, which will let China station its secret police there. The message is clear. Rule by fear is about to begin.

This is the most flagrant violation yet of the principle of “one country, two systems”. When the British colony was handed back to China in 1997, China agreed that Hong Kong would enjoy a “high degree of autonomy”, including impartial courts and free speech. Many Hong Kongers are outraged (see article). Some investors are scared, too. The territory’s stockmarket fell by 5.6% on May 22nd, its biggest drop in five years. Hong Kong is a global commercial hub not only because it is situated next to the Chinese mainland, but also because it enjoys the rule of law. Business disputes are settled impartially, by rules that are known in advance. If China’s unaccountable enforcers are free to impose the party’s whims in Hong Kong, it will be a less attractive place for global firms to operate.

China’s move also has implications far beyond Hong Kong. “One country, two systems” was supposed to be a model for Taiwan, a democratic island of 24m that China also sees as its own. The aim was to show that reunification with the motherland need not mean losing one’s liberty. Under President Xi Jinping, China seems to have tired of this charade. Increasingly, it is making bare-knuckle threats instead. The re-election in January of a China-sceptic Taiwanese president, Tsai Ing-wen, will have convinced China’s rulers that the chances of a peaceful reunification are vanishingly small. On May 22nd, at the opening of China’s rubber-stamp parliament, the prime minister, Li Keqiang, ominously cut the word “peaceful” from his ritual reference to reunification. China has stepped up war games around Taiwan and its nationalists have been braying online for an invasion.

China is at odds with other countries, too. In its building of island fortresses in the South China Sea, it ignores both international law and the claims of smaller neighbours. This week hundreds, perhaps thousands of Chinese troops crossed China’s disputed border with India in the Himalayas. Minor scuffles along this frontier are common, but the latest incursion came as a state-owned Chinese paper asserted new claims to land that its nuclear-armed neighbour deems Indian (see article). And, as a sombre backdrop to all this, relations with the United States are worse than they have been in decades, poisoning everything from trade and investment to scientific collaboration.

However much all the regional muscle-flexing appals the world, it makes sense to the Chinese Communist Party. In Hong Kong the party wants to stop a “colour revolution”, which it thinks could bring democrats to power there despite China’s best efforts to rig the system. If eroding Hong Kong’s freedoms causes economic damage, so be it, party bigwigs reason. The territory is still an important place for Chinese firms to raise international capital, especially since the Sino-American feud makes it harder and riskier for them to do so in New York. But Hong Kong’s gdp is equivalent to only 3% of mainland China’s now, down from more than 18% in 1997, because the mainland’s economy has grown 15-fold since then. China’s rulers assume that multinational firms and banks will keep a base in Hong Kong, simply to be near the vast Chinese market. They are probably right.

The simple picture that President Donald Trump paints of America and China locked in confrontation suits China’s rulers well. The party thinks that the balance of power is shifting in China’s favour. Mr Trump’s insults feed Chinese nationalist anger, which the party is delighted to exploit—just as it does any tensions between America and its allies. It portrays the democracy movement in Hong Kong as an American plot. That is absurd, but it helps explain many mainlanders’ scorn for Hong Kong’s protesters.

The rest of the world should stand up to China’s bullying. On the Sino-Indian border, the two sides should talk more to avoid miscalculations, as their leaders promised to in 2018. China should realise that, if it tries the tactics it has used in the South China Sea, building structures on disputed ground and daring others to push back, it will be viewed with greater distrust by all its neighbours.

In the case of Taiwan China faces a powerful deterrent: a suggestion in American law that America might come to Taiwan’s aid were the island to be attacked. There is a growing risk that a cocksure China may decide to put that to the test. America should make clear that doing so would be extremely dangerous. America’s allies should echo that, loudly.

Hong Kong’s options are bleaker. The Hong Kong Policy Act requires America to certify annually that the territory should in trade and other matters be treated as separate from China. This week the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, declared that “facts on the ground” show Hong Kong is no longer autonomous. This allows America to slap tariffs on the territory’s exports, as it already does to those from the mainland. That is a powerful weapon, but the scope for miscalculation is vast, potentially harming Hong Kongers and driving out global firms and banks. It would be better, as the law also proposes, to impose sanctions on officials who abuse human rights in Hong Kong. Also, Britain should grant full residency rights to the hundreds of thousands of Hong Kongers who hold a kind of second-class British passport—much as Ms Tsai this week opened Taiwan’s door to Hong Kong citizens. None of this will stop China from imposing its will on Hong Kong. The party’s interests always trump the people’s. ■

這是讀者send給我的，希望能和大家分享7.21元朗恐襲的情況。
歡迎轉載，讓更多人看見香港發生了甚麼事。

---

〈完美的一天 A Perfect Day〉

尋日（2019年7月21日）爭少少就係完美嘅一天。
It is almost a perfect day yesterday (21 July 2019).
我係一個普通嘅香港市民，八十後、基督徒、亦係天水圍人，尋日係星期日，我如常同太太出返九龍區嘅教會返崇拜，食完個晏就同太太同朋友去咗尖沙咀行街，之後喺海運戲院睇《反斗奇兵4》，然後食完飯就坐西鐵返屋企。

I am a normal Hong Kong citizen. Born in the 80's, a Christian who lives in Tin Shui Wai. Yesterday was a normal Sunday. I went back to church to join the worship with my wife in Kowloon, joined our friends for lunch in Tsim Sha Tsui, watched Toy Story 4 at the Grand Ocean cinema, and went back home after dinner by West Rail.

大約晚上十點幾喺柯士甸站上西鐵，上咗西鐵一切都好平常，直到接近十一點左右去到元朗站，月台上面傳來大叫「有人受傷、需要支援」嘅呼叫聲，而列車亦因為混亂無法開車，我就落咗去大堂睇一睇發生咩事，老婆留咗喺車廂入面。原來大堂果度一班喺閘入面嘅人已經開緊遮，佢哋俾一班閘外面身穿白色tee裇嘅人以木棍、水樽、棒球棍襲擊緊，出唔到閘。我最初觀察白衫人大約有四五十人左右，都係中年，亦有較年長嘅，識講廣東話粗口，兇神惡煞，非常激動。

At about 10pm, we were at the Austin Station, everything looked normal in the West Rail train. Our train arrived at Yuen Long Station just before 11pm, we heard a screaming, "Someone's hurt, we need backups!", and our train was stopped because of this confusion. I asked my wife to stay in the train, while I got off and went down to the station lobby to see what happened. Inside the gate, there were people holding their umbrellas up, defending from a group of gangsters who were all wearing white-shirts, attacking people inside the gate with wooden sticks, water bottles and baseball bats. People were trapped inside. There were around 40 to 50 white-shirt gangsters, mainly in their middle-aged, some were even older, shouted fiercely in Cantonese foul languages with agitation.

閘內地下留有鮮血血跡，我亦望到遠處閘外大堂有一名傷者受傷倒地，不斷俾白衫人凶緊，因為情況太危險我就無出閘幫手。我本身後退緊，打算上返車廂，就喺呢個時候閘內嘅市民突然全部退後，一湧而來，部份人衝入廁所，其他人就喺我身邊經過衝上扶手電梯梯同樓梯上月台，打算入車廂。

There were fresh blood stains on the floor inside the gate. Outside the gate not far away, there was someone injured, lying down on the floor, constantly threatening by a white-shirt gangster. I did not go out and help him due to the dangerous situation and I tended to go back up to the train. At that very moment, people inside the gate were suddenly moved back towards me. Some rushed into the washroom, others ran passed me and dashed to the platform through the escalators and staircase, and planned to reach the train for safety.

我見身邊有人跌倒，想幫又幫唔到手。然後白衫人已經殺到埋身，我正準備跑上扶手電梯上月台嘅時候就俾人從後襲擊咗後腦一下，我一邊跑一邊回望，睇到一個白衫人拎住枝棒球棍對住扶手電梯上面嘅人（包括我）大聲叫罵「 ___ 你老母」（第一個字聽得唔太清楚，請自行填充。）

Someone fell down next to me, I wished to help but I couldn't. The white-shirt gangsters were fast approaching, and I was about to rush back to the escalator. All of a sudden, I was attacked at my hindbrain, out of nowhere! I kept running and looked back at the attacker, it was a white-shirt gangster who was holding a baseball bat, yelling to the people (including me) on the escalator: YOU MOTHER _______ ! (I didn't hear it clearly, fill-in as you like)

我繼續上返月台，之後回頭望佢並無再追上嚟。我同其他乘客求奇衝入咗最尾一卡車廂，本身我都唔知自己流血，後來有其他乘客話我知我流緊血至知自己受咗傷。最後有啲熱心嘅乘客幫我消毒同包扎傷口（回想返先記得我咁大個仔都係第一次用M巾），同埋讓咗個位俾我坐。

I kept fleeing back to the platform, that white-shirt gangster had stopped chasing us. I went in the train with other passengers, and I did not even realized that I was bleeding until someone told me. Some very friendly passengers helped me to clean and wrap the wound (well, that was the first time I used sanitary pad), and nice enough to give me a seat.

過程之中我一邊用電話聯絡返老婆同佢報平安，佢話有人入咗車廂打人。而身邊嘅乘客都好不安，因為好擔心白衫嘅黑社會（我嗰刻至知原來係黑社會嚟嘅）會衝入嚟打人，好想快啲開車。同時亦開始有人話前面車廂（我係車尾）已經打緊，情況好混亂，好多人都好驚同鼓譟。唔知過咗幾耐（好似港鐵出咗聲明「詳細交代事件」，應該有寫詳細時間），我就坐返同一班列車去天水圍站，匯合返我老婆同遇到救護員，送咗去天水圍醫院，聯咗三針。我喺急症室等候期間，都不斷有被打受傷嘅人送入嚟急症室，估計有五至六個都係喺西鐵被襲的。

I was talking to my wife through the phone throughout the whole process. She told me that those gangsters were attacking people inside the train. Passengers around me were extremely worried, we were all afraid that those white-shirt Triad gangsters (now I knew they are Triad) will storme in and attack. We all hope that the train will move out from the station soon. At the same time, people were saying that there were attacks at the train head (I was at the tail), we were all in confusions and panics. After some minutes (looks like the MTR has made a statement regarding the detailed time), the train has finally moved, and I arrived Tin Shui Wai Station at last. I found my wife, we went straight to an Ambulanceman and admitted to the Tin Shui Wai Hospital afterwards, where I had my three stitches done. While I was waiting in the Emergency Room, 5 or 6 more injured people were sent in due to the West Rail attack.

急症室當值嘅警察都有主動問我係咪需要報案，我考慮咗一陣最後都同意咗，後來重案組亦係大約兩三個鐘後嚟同我落口供，佢問完個人資料之後，第一個問題就係問我有無出去遊行。我答無，佢好似有少少疑惑，我就拎返我張染咗血漬嘅《反斗奇兵4》嘅票尾比佢睇，佢先至再繼續同我落口供。最後我搞到清晨五點幾至返到屋企。

Policeman stationed in the Emergency Room has asked if I need to file a report. I had agreed after some consideration. The Crime Unit has also arrived after 2 to 3 hours to take my statement. After taking my personal information, he asked directly, "Did you join the protest march today?" I said, "No". He looked doubt. I took out the Toy Story 4 ticket stained with my blood and showed him, then he stopped questioning me. Eventually, I went home at about 5am.

其實本身尋日都係好平常嘅一日，同老婆行街、睇戲、食飯。之前我一直都有留意社會上發生嘅事，知道社會瀰漫住好多負面情緒。所以尋日我本身都打算俾自己抖一抖，放低時事一日。無奈就喺我休息、喺我最平常嘅生活當中，遇上咗無差別嘅襲擊，正所謂「我唔搞政治、政治一樣會嚟搞我」。我俾人扑濕，一定係我有做錯，而我最錯嘅係咩？我諗應該係因為我睇咗美帝嘅卡通電影。

It was a very normal day yesterday - shopping with my wife, watching movie, have a great dinner. I know what had happened lately in this city and how desperate people are these days. So I planned to have a relaxed day and free from the news. The ironic part is, on the day I was trying to rest and have a life, it was the day I encountered the indiscriminate attack. There is this saying, "you don't mess with politics, politics will mess with you eventually". I was attacked, so I must have done something wrong? What did I do wrong? Oh, I guess it must have been about me watching the American animation.

我知道我受嘅傷，同喺中上環俾警察無預警下開槍射傷嘅市民比，實在係微不足道（其實佢哋更應被關注！）。不過身邊聽到我經歷嘅朋友都好驚、好忿怒，其實我都係好忿怒、好無助，我地都無辦法明白到底點解坐西鐵返屋企會俾黑社會打，而點解警察又唔嚟阻止？但我更加感受到嘅係市民果種恐懼同絕望感，人群閃躲之際有人跌倒，有人落單，大家衝入車廂果陣會唔會發生人踩人？我老婆都陪伴咗個受驚而情緒失控嘅少女。大家都好驚、好恐懼、好絕望、好furious。人係受威脅之下，會出現figh-or-flight的反應，喺腎上腺素嘅驅使之下，一係會反擊，一係會逃走，但手無寸鐵嘅市民被圍困係車廂中被人撳住嚟打，既不能fight , 又不能flight，果種絕望同恐懼的確唔係三言兩語講得明白，往後嘅心理創傷同陰影烙印，可以係一生之久。

Comparing to those protesters shot by the Policemen without warning in Sheung Wan and Central, I was nothing (we should pay more attention to them instead!). But friends around me were shocked and outraged about my attack. To be frank, I was shocked too. Who would imagine that attack will come when I was just taking the West Rail train back home? And where were the Policemen when we need them? And most of all, I experienced the same fear and desperation with the passengers. People were dodging, falling down, left behind, there could be stampede when we rushed back to the train! My wife had also stayed and comforted a young girl who had almost lost control because of the frightening situation. Everyone was afraid, worried, hopeless and furious. When people are being threatened, there is a response called "fight-or-flight". The adrenaline will drive you to either fight back or take flight. Unfortunately, when we were unarmed and trapped inside the train, we cannot fight back, we cannot take flight, there is no word to describe the despair and fear in that scenario. The psychological trauma and shadow can be life-long.

的確，喺某啲人眼中，無論我係幾無辜被打，我走得慢所以我都依然係抵死，又或者一定係我經過元朗所以抵打。但我呢刻已經無力去鬧爆佢哋，咁做對我嚟講亦係無乜意思。我唔覺得襲擊我嘅人有幾大機會會被繩之於法，我亦都唔想停留喺去點樣出呢啖氣。難道戰爭中國家的政府會為一個被殺嘅平民作出調查麼？戰時社會有戰時嘅生存法則，我不得不面對現實：香港其實同戰爭社會已經無乜大分別，香港警隊同呢個政府係點做嘢，我已經無興趣知。

Some people may say, regardless of how innocent I am, that still, I was to blame. Maybe I ran too slow so I was meant to be attacked. Maybe I passed by Yuen Long so I should have known it better. I do not want to debate with their accusations, it is meaningless anyway. In my believe, there is no hope in taking the attacker down in my case, and I have no intention to take revenge. You see, when there is war in a country, the government will not take it serious when a citizen got killed. Wartime society has its own law of survival, and I have to deal with this reality: Hong Kong is in war now, and I have zero interest in what the HK Police Force and the government will take serious into.

但我都仍然想表達，香港人真係好有愛，喺亂世之時，大家都仍然能夠守望相助，我感受到被愛。車上嘅乘客不斷安慰我，不斷喺有限嘅物資之中幫我消毒止血做急救，救護員都幫咗我好多，我嘅朋友本身已經返咗喺市區嘅屋企都衝返入嚟睇我，亦有朋友係專登揸車入嚟，我嘅屋企人陪我喺急症室等通宵。所有朋友嘅安慰、慰問同祝福我都感受到。

There is one thing I must say. Hong Kong people are really full of passion. During this chaotic time, people are still willing to look after each other. I am blessed with their love: Passengers on the train have comforted me, treated my wound carefully when there is lack of first-aid materials; the professional treatment by the Ambulancemen; some friends have even rushed back after arriving their homes in downtown, one even drove his car all the way to the hospital; my family who have stayed with me in the Emergency Room throughout the whole night; all the comforts, loves and blessings from my friends…I am so blessed.

我唔係想講受襲嘅事唔重要，或者我要淡化、粉飾太平，我相信任何一個有良知嘅人都會對所有尋晚係西鐵上無辜受襲嘅市民感到心痛同忿怒。不過，我亦知道我哋呢種忿怒已經無處可容，因為呢個社會嘅制度已經崩壞，極權肆虐到一個點係唔可能再容許我哋有自己嘅思想同感受。塗鴉一個圖案可以係破壞政府管治基礎嘅底線，如此荒謬嘅話仲係出自一區首長之口，譴責圖案受破壞，比危殆嘅人命還緊要，我就明白到，無人性嘅極權眼中又點會睇到平民百姓人命價值嘅可貴？呢個邪惡嘅政治制度不過係想透過「收買人命」嘅恐慌嚟製造威權管治嘅理由，逼使人民放棄思想同抗爭，做個順民去拜服極權，等佢哋以為自己可以千秋萬世。

I will not say that the attack is not important, or lighten it up or paper over the cracks. Anyone have conscious will definitely be heartbroken and ambushed about the attack at the West Rail. But the truth is that, our outrageous has nowhere to escape. Our society system is corrupting, the totalitarianism is raging brutally to a point where no one is allowed to have their own thinking and feeling. When a simple graffiti is an act to test the bottom line of the government's governance, when the Chief Executive ridiculously condemns the destruction of a symbolic device more than the vicious attack to innocent citizen, I know that our lives have absolutely no values to these senior officials. This evil political system is taking lives, creating the chaos and the reason for their stuck-up governance, forcing the people to give up fighting, while eventually the people will worship them as gods with their kingdom lasts forever.

但係，在荒謬絕倫、置身喺邪惡陰謀嘅被襲經驗之中，我感受到身邊仍然有可愛嘅人，無論係素未謀面嘅乘客、救護員、定係我嘅朋友同家人，係佢地嘅愛同關心，使我能夠克服果種面對荒謬時嘅無助感，令我能夠有信心繼續行落去，有勇氣去面對果份無可躲避嘅恐懼，有盼望去戰勝果啲因擔心無差別隨機攻擊而帶嚟嘅心理壓力。

However, in this ridiculous attack experience under the evil conspiracy, there are lovely people around me: passengers , Ambulancemen, friends and family, for their loves and comforts give me the strength to overcome the helpless feeling throughout this absurd situation, the faith to move on, the courage to face the inevitable fear, and the hope to concur the in-depth pressure caused by the desperation of the indiscriminate attack.

昨日的我，經歷了被襲擊，令我完美的一天不再完美，但我卻在遭害和恐懼當中發現了愛和勇氣，是香港人守望的愛。

I was attacked yesterday, and it made my perfect day imperfect. But I found love and courage in the time of danger and fear. Hong Kong people do watch over for each other.

是的，香港人很有愛，所以我們值得擁有比現在更好的社會領袖和政治制度，We deserve better。因為你們有愛，所以我能夠不再怕遭害。因為你們有愛，所以我能夠堅持這個心願。因為你們有愛，所以我有信心香港人能夠一齊撐落去。

HongKongers are so full of love, that is why we deserve better society leaders and political system. We DO deserve better. Because of your love, I do not fear the danger. Because of your love, I can hold tight to hope. Because of your love, I have faith that HongKongers can stick together and make our own future.

香港人，加油💪🏻！
HongKongers, ADD OIL!

黃浩銘：

//法官閣下，我能夠參與雨傘運動，爭取民主，實是毫無悔意，畢生榮幸。我已花了最青春的10年在社會運動上，假若我有80歲，我仍有50年可以與港人同行，繼續奮鬥。要是法官不信，且即管以刑罰來考驗我的意志，試煉我的決心，希望我的戰友們在我囚禁的時候，可以激發愛心，勉勵行善，更加有勇氣和力量作個真誠的人對抗謊言治國的中共政權。

　　「希望在於人民，改變始於抗爭」，唯有透過群眾力量，直接行動，才能改變社會。8年前如是，今日亦如是。但願港人堅定不移，爭取民主，打倒特權，彰顯公義。自由萬歲！民主社會主義萬歲！願公義和慈愛的　主耶穌基督與我同在，與法官先生同在，與香港人同在！//

希望在於人民　改變始於抗爭
—雨傘運動公眾妨擾案陳情書

陳法官仲衡閣下：

　　自2011年你審理只有23歲的我，追問時任特首曾蔭權知否米貴涉擾亂公眾秩序的案件距今已有8年。在命運的安排下，我再次站在你面前，只是當你讀到這封陳情書的時候，我已經不是當年被你宣判無罪釋放的年青人，而是一個準備迎接第三次入獄的積犯。然而，今天我不是尋求你的憐憫，而是希望道明我參與雨傘運動，公民抗命的緣由，讓法官閣下可以從我的動機及行為來給予合理判刑。

　　8年以來，我們的崗位稍有轉變，但香港的變化更大，充滿爭議的各個大白象基建均已落成，更多旅客走訪社區，似是一片繁華景象，但同時，更多窮人住在劏房，更多群眾走上街頭，亦有更多我們愛惜的年青人進入監牢。從前我們認為香港不會發生的事，都一一在這8年間發生了。當我8年前站在你面前那一刻，我們都不會想像得到香港人可被挾持返大陸，亦想像不到原來有一天大陸的執法人員可在香港某地方正當執法，更想像不到中共政府除了透過人大釋法外，還可藉著「一言九鼎」的人大決定，甚至中央公函來決定香港人的前途命運和收緊憲制權利。

爭取民主的本意

　　民主只是口號嗎？當年，我痛罵無視100萬窮人及30萬貧窮長者利益，卻慶祝不知辛亥革命本意的前行政長官曾蔭權，並要求設立全民退休保障，廢除強積金，因此首次被捕被控。但時至今日，香港仍然有過百萬貧窮人口，超過30萬貧窮長者，貧富懸殊及房屋短缺的問題愈加嚴重。2014年，我見過一位75歲的伯伯跪在立法會公聽會向時任勞工及福利局局長張建宗下跪，懇求政府不要拆遷古洞石仔嶺安老院。2019年，我又見到一位67歲執紙皮維生的婆婆在立法會公聽會哭訴難以找工作，現任勞工及福利局局長羅致光竟然叫她找勞工處。為何官員如此冷酷無情？為何我們的意見均未能影響政府施政？歸根結柢，就是因為香港人沒有真正的選擇，喪失本來應有制訂政策及監督的權力！

　　所謂民主，就是人民當家作主。任何施政，應當由人民倡議監督，公義分配，改善公共服務，使得貧者脫貧，富者節約。今日香港，顧全大陸，官商勾結，貧富懸殊，耗資千億的大白象跨境基建接踵而來，但當遇見護士猝死，教師自殺，老人下跪，政府政策就只有小修小補，小恩小惠，試問如何服眾？由1966年蘇守忠、盧麒公民抗命反對天星小輪加價，乃至1967年暴動及1989年中國愛國民主運動，甚至2003年反廿三條大遊行，無不是因政權專政，政策傾斜，分配不公，引致大規模民眾反抗。2014年雨傘運動的起點，亦是如此。

　　多年來，港人爭取民主，為求有公義分配，有尊嚴生活，有自主空間，但我們得到的是甚麼？1984年，中英兩國簽署《聯合聲明》前夕，前中共總書記趙紫陽曾回覆香港大學學生會要求「民主治港，普選特首」的訴求，清楚承諾「你們所說的『民主治港』是理所當然的」。當時，不少港人信以為真，誤以為回歸之後可得民主，但自1989年六四血腥鎮壓及2003年50萬人反對《廿三條》立法大遊行後，中共圖窮匕現，在2004年透過人大釋法收緊政制改革程序，並粗暴地決定2007及2008不會普選行政長官及立法會。自此，完全不民主的中國立法機關－全國人民代表大會常務委員會掌控香港人的命運福祉，人大釋法及人大決定可以隨時隨地配合極權政府的主張，命令香港法庭跟從，打壓香港的民主和法治。

　　2014年8月31日，是歷史的轉捩點。儘管多少溫和學者苦苦規勸，中共仍以6月的＜一國兩制白皮書＞為基礎，展示全面管治權的氣派，包括法官閣下在內，都要屈從愛國之說。在《8‧31人大決定》之後，中共完全暴露其假民主假普選的面目，其時，我們認為對抗方法就只有公民抗命。

公民抗命的起點

　　違法就是罪惡嗎？我們違法，稱之為「公民抗命」，就是公民憑良心為公眾利益，以非暴力形式不服從法律命令，以求改變不義制度或法律。終審法院非常任法官賀輔明（Leonard Hoffmann）勳爵曾在英國著名案例 R v Jones (Margaret) [2007] 1 AC 136 案提出：「發自良知的公民抗命，有着悠久及光榮的傳統。那些因着信念認為法律及政府行為是不義而違法的人，歷史很多時候都證明他們是正確的……能包容這種抗爭或示威，是文明社會的印記。」

　　終審法院在最近的公民廣場案（Secretary for Justice v Wong Chi Fung (2018) 21 HKCFAR 35）亦道明「公民抗命」的概念可獲肯定（該案判詞第70至72段）。因此，亦印證我等9人及其他公民抗命者並非可以一般「違法犯事」來解釋及施刑。港人以一般遊行示威爭取民主30年，無論從殖民年代乃至特區年代，皆無顯著改進，今日以更進步主張，公民抗命爭取民主，正如印度、南非、波蘭等對抗強權，實在無可厚非。誠然，堵塞主要幹道，影響民眾上班下課，實非我所願，但回想過來，中共及特區政府多年來豈不更堵塞香港民主之路，妨擾公眾獲得真正的發聲機會？

　　如果我是公民抗命，又何以不認罪承擔刑責？2014年12月，警方以成文法「出席未經批准集結」及「煽動參與未經批准集結」在村口將我逮捕。2017年3月，警方改以普通法「煽惑他人作出公眾妨擾」及「煽惑他人煽惑公眾妨擾」提控。正如戴耀廷先生在其結案陳詞引述英國劍橋大學法學教授 John R. Spencer 提及以普通法提訴的問題：「近年差不多所有以『公眾妨擾罪』來起訴的案件，都出現以下兩種情況的其中一個：一、當被告人的行為是觸犯了成文法律，通常懲罰是輕微的，檢控官想要以一支更大或額外的棒子去打他；二、當被告人的行為看來是明顯完全不涉及刑事責任的，檢控官找不到其他罪名可控訴他」，無獨有偶，前終審法院常任法官鄧楨在其2018年退休致詞提及：「普通法同樣可被用作欺壓的工具。它是一種變化多端的權力，除非妥善地運用人權法加以適當控制，否則可被不當使用。」如今看來，所言非虛。

　　今我遭控二罪，必定據理力爭，冀借助法官閣下明智判決推翻檢控不義，但法庭定讞，我自當承擔刑責，絕無怨言，以成全公民抗命之道。

試問誰還未覺醒

　　我是刻意求刑標榜自己，讓年青人跟從走進監獄大門嗎？我反覆推敲這個問題。然而，我的答案是，正正是希望後輩不用像我此般走進牢獄，我更要無懼怕地爭取人們所當得的。縱使今日面對強權，惡法將至，烏雲密佈，我依然一如既往，毋忘初衷地認為真普選才是港人獲得真正自由之路。任何一個聲稱為下一代福祉者，理應為後輩爭取自由平等的選擇權利，讓他們能自立成長，辨明是非，而非家長式管控思想，讓下一代淪為生財工具，朝廷鷹犬。

　　主耶穌基督說：「我確確實實地告訴你們：一粒麥子如果不落在地裡死去，它仍然是一粒；如果死了，就結出很多子粒來。（《約翰福音》第12章24節）」沒有犧牲，沒有收穫。故然，我不希望年青人跟我一樣要踏上公民抗命之路，承受牢獄之苦，但我請教所有智慧之士，既然舉牌示威遊行均已無顯其效，公民抗命和平抗爭為何不是能令政權受壓求變之策？若非偌大群眾運動，梁振英豈不仍安坐其位？

　　刑罰於我而言，無情可求，唯一我心中所想，就是希望法庭能顧念75歲的朱耀明牧師年事已高，望以非監禁方式處之，讓港人瞥見法庭對良心公民抗命者寬容一面。美國法哲學家羅納德‧德沃金（Ronald Dworkin）在1968年論及公民抗命時（On Not Prosecuting Civil Disobedience），不但認為法庭應給予公民抗命者寬鬆刑罰，甚至應不予起訴。事實上，終審法院非常任法官賀輔明在2014年12月4日，即雨傘運動尾聲（已發生大規模堵路多日），佔中三子自首之後一日，接受《蘋果日報》及《南華早報》訪問時提到「抗爭者及掌權者均未有逾越公民抗命的『遊戲規則』，抗爭活動並沒有損害香港法治」，更進一步提到「一旦他們被判有罪，應該從輕發落，認為這是傳統，因為自首的公民不是邪惡的人」，由此，我期盼法庭將有人道的判刑。

　　法官閣下，我能夠參與雨傘運動，爭取民主，實是毫無悔意，畢生榮幸。我已花了最青春的10年在社會運動上，假若我有80歲，我仍有50年可以與港人同行，繼續奮鬥。要是法官不信，且即管以刑罰來考驗我的意志，試煉我的決心，希望我的戰友們在我囚禁的時候，可以激發愛心，勉勵行善，更加有勇氣和力量作個真誠的人對抗謊言治國的中共政權。

　　「希望在於人民，改變始於抗爭」，唯有透過群眾力量，直接行動，才能改變社會。8年前如是，今日亦如是。但願港人堅定不移，爭取民主，打倒特權，彰顯公義。自由萬歲！民主社會主義萬歲！

　　願公義和慈愛的　主耶穌基督與我同在，與法官先生同在，與香港人同在！

社會民主連線副主席、雨傘運動案第八被告
黃浩銘
二零一九年四月九日

Hope lies in the people
Changes come from resistance
- Umbrella Movement Public Nuisance Case Statement

Your Honour Judge Johnny Chan,

It has been 8 years since I have met you in court. You were the judge to my case on disorder in public places. It was in 2011 and I was only 23 years old. I chased after the then Chief Executive Mr. Donald Tsang and asked if he knew the price of rice and whether he understood the struggles of the poor. Fate has brought us here again, I am before you once again, but I am no longer the young man who was acquitted. When you are reading this statement, I am a “recidivist”, ready to be sent to prison for the third time. However, I do not seek your mercy today, but wish to explain the reasons for my participation in the Umbrella Movement and civil disobedience, so that your honour can give a reasonable sentence through understanding my motives and actions.

Our positions have slightly altered in the past 8 years, but not as great as the changes that took place in Hong Kong. The controversial big white elephant infrastructures were completed. More tourists are visiting, making Hong Kong a bustling city. At the same time, however, more poor people are living in sub-divided flats, more people are forced to the street to protest, more young people are sent to jail. Things we wouldn’t have imagined 8 years are now happening in Hong Kong. When I was before you 8 years ago, we would not have imagined Hong Kong people could be kidnapped by the Chinese authority to Mainland China. We wouldn’t have imagined that one day, the Mainland law enforcement officers could perform their duties in Hong Kong. We wouldn’t have imagined, not only could the Community Chinese government interpret our law, but they could decide on our future and tightened the rule on constitutional rights through the National People’s Congress Decision.

The Original Intention

Is democracy just a slogan? 8 years ago, I criticised the then Chief Executive Mr. Donald Tsang for ignoring the interests of 1 million poor people and 300,000 elderly. I scolded him for celebrating the 1911 Revolution without understanding its preliminary belief. I called for the establishment of universal retirement protection and the abolition of MPF, and was arrested for the first time. Yet, there are still over a million poor people in Hong Kong today, with more than 300,000 of poor elderly. The disparity between the rich and the poor and housing problem have only become worsen.

In 2014, I witnessed a 75-year-old man kneeling before the Secretary for Labour and Welfare Mr. Matthew Cheung Kin-Chung at a public hearing in the Legislative Council. The old man begged the government not to demolish the elderly home in Kwu Tung Dills Corner. In 2019, a 67-year-old woman, who scavenges for cardboards to make a living, cried during the Legislative Council public hearing. She cried because it was impossible for her to get a job. The Secretary for Labour and Welfare Mr. Law Chi-Kwong simply told her to ask for help in the Labour Department. Why are the government officials so callous? Why have our opinions failed to affect the government’s administration? The root of the problem is that Hong Kong people do not have real choices, we have been deprived of the power to supervise the government and to formulate policies.

What is democracy? Democracy means people are the masters. Any policies should be supervised by the people, the society’s resources should be justly distributed to improve the public services, so that the poor is no longer in poverty. However, in today’s Hong Kong, the focus is on the Mainland China, there is collusion between the government and the businesses, there is a great disparity between the rich and the poor, and multi-billion-dollar big white elephant cross-border infrastructure are built one after another. Nurses die from overexertion at work, teachers commit suicide and old man kneels to beg for what he deserves. Yet, the government policies were only minor repairs here and there, giving small treats and favours to the people. How can you win the support of the people? From the civil disobedience movement in 1966 by So Sau-chung and Lo Kei against the increase of Star Ferry fare, until the 1967 riots and 1989 China Patriotic Democratic Movement, even the 2003 march against the purported legistlation of Article 23, they were all due to the political dictatorship, imbalance policies as well as unfair distribution of public resources. It is for these reasons that led to large scale protests. It is for the same reason that the 2014 Umbrella Movement started.

For so many years, Hong Kong people have been fighting for democracy. We demand a just allocation, a life with dignity and space of freedom. However, what do we get in return? On the eve of the signing of the Joint Declaration in 1984, the then premier of the Communist Chinese government Zhao Ziyang in his reply to the demand for democracy and universal suffrage by the University of Hong Kong Student Council clearly promised that ‘what you referred to, namely “rule Hong Kong by democracy” is a matter that goes without saying.’ At the time, a lot of Hong Kong people believed it. They thought they would have democracy after the handover. However, since the bloody suppression on 4th June 1989 and the 500,000 people demonstration against Article 23 in 2003, the plot of the Chinese communist revealed itself. They decided by force through the NPC interpretation in 2004 that there would be no universal suffrage of the Chief Executive and the Legislative Council in 2007 and 2008. Since then, the undemocratic authority of NPC kept a tight grip on the destiny of Hong Kong people. NPC’s interpretation and decisions can be deployed anytime when convenient to assist the propaganda of the authoritative government, forcing the hands of the Hong Kong court and suppressing Hong Kong democracy and the rule of law.

31st August 2014 was a turning point in history. No matter how the moderate scholars tried to persuade it from happening, the Community Chinese government has used the One Country Two System White Paper in June as the foundation and forced its way down onto the people. Even your honour was among them, succumbed to the so called patriotism. After the 8.31 Decision of the National People’s Congress, the plot of the Communist Chinese government has revealed itself, the Chinese government has been lying to the Hong Kong people, they never intended to give Hong Kong genuine universal suffrage. At that time, we believed that civil disobedience was inevitable and was the only way out.

The Starting Point of Civil Disobedience

Is breaking the law sinful? We broke the law with a cause, as “civil disobedience” is the refusal to comply with certain laws considered unjust, as a peaceful form of political protest in the interest of the public to change the unjust system or law. Non-Permanent Judge of the Court of Final Appeal Honourable Leonard Hoffman stated in the well-known R v Jones (Margaret) [2007] 1 AC 136 case that, “civil disobedience on conscientious grounds has a long and honourable history in this country. People who break the law to affirm their belief in the injustice of a law or government action are sometime vindicated by history. It is the mark of a civilised community that it can accommodate protests and demonstrations of this kind.”

The recent decision by the Court of Appeal concerning the Civic Square outside the government headquarter（Secretary for Justice v Wong Chi Fung (2018) 21 HKCFAR 35) also confirmed the idea of civil disobedience(paragraphs 70-72 of the judgment refer). This , therefore, confirmed that myself and the other 8 defendants as well as other civil disobedience protestors, should not be understood as “breaking the law” in its general circumstances, nor should our sentencing be weighted against the usual standard. Hong Kong people have been fighting for democracy through protest for 30 years already, whether it was during the times of colonial British rule or during the special administrative region, there has been no improvement. Today, we fought for democracy, just as the fights for freedom and democracy in India, South Africa and Poland, and civil disobedience is inevitable. It is true that we did not want to block the roads or affect Hong Kong citizens attending to work or school. But on reflection, didn’t the Communist Chinese and Special Administrative governments block our road to democracy and interfere with our rights to speak up?

If what I did was in the name of civil disobedience, why should I defend my case and not bear the criminal responsibility? In December 2014, the police made use of the statutory offences of “attending unauthorised assembly and inciting participation in unauthorised assembly” and arrested me at the village I live in. In March 2017, the police amended their charges to common law offences of “incitement to commit public nuisance and incitement to incite public nuisance”. As Mr. Benny Tai said in his closing submissions, quoting law professor of Cambridge University John R. Spencer on common law charges, “...almost all the prosecutions for public nuisance in recent years seem to have taken place in one of two situations: first, where the defendant’s behaviour amounted to a statutory offence, typically punishable with a small penalty, and the prosecutor wanted a bigger or extra stick to beat him with, and secondly, where the defendant’s behaviour was not obviously criminal at all and the prosecutor could think of nothing else to charge him with.” Coincidentally, the then Court of Appeal Honourable Mr Justice Robert Tang Kwok-ching stated in his retirement speech in 2018 that, “Common law can be used oppressively. It is protean power, unless adequately controlled by the proper application of human rights law, can be misused.” What he said has become true today.

Faced with 2 charges, I am going to stand by reasons and my principles, in order to assist the Court to overturn an unjust prosecution. However, should the court find me guilty, I shall bear the criminal responsibility. I have no qualm or regrets, in fulfilment of my chosen path of civil disobedience.

Who has not yet awoken?

I do reflect as to whether I am simply seeking a criminal sentence in order to make a point, or to encourage other young men to follow my footsteps into the gates of the prison. I have reflected upon this repeatedly. However, my answer is that, I am doing this precisely because I do not wish to see other young men following my suit into the prison. Because of this, I need to fight for what is ours fearlessly. Although today we are confronted by an oppressive authority, the looming legislation of unjust laws and a clouded future, I shall be as I always am: relentless maintaining my stance that a real election is the path to freedom for Hong Kong people. Anyone who claims to be acting in the interest of the next generation should fight for a free and equal choice for their youths. This is in order for them to learn to be independent, to be able to tell rights from wrongs. There should be no paternal thinking, simply teaching the next generation to be slaves of money and accessories to the oppressor.

My Lord Jesus Christ has said: ‘Very truly I tell you, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. (Book of John 12:24.) Without sacrifice, there is no reward. I don’t wish to see any more young men having to join the path of civil disobedience as I did, and to pay the price as I did. However, I ask this of all men and women of wisdom: if peaceful demonstration in the old fashioned way has lost its effectiveness and was simply ignored, why is peaceful civil disobedience not a good way to bring about change whilst one is being oppressed? If not for this crowd movement, C Y Leung would still be sitting comfortably on the throne.

I have no mitigation to submit. I only wish that the Court would spare Reverend Chu, who is an elderly of 75 years of age. I pray that a non-custodial sentence may be passed for Reverend Chu. I hope that the Court will have leniency and mercy for Reverend Chu. I refer to the work of the American legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin in 1968, namely: ‘On Not Prosecuting Civil Disobedience’. He opined that, not only should the Court allow leniency to civil disobedience participants, but also should they not be prosecuted. In fact, Lord Hoffmann NPJ of the CFA stated the following in an interview with Apple Daily and South China Morning Post on 4th December 2014 (which was at the end of the Umbrella Movement, a day before the surrender of the 3 initiators of the Occupy Central Movement): ‘In any civilised society, there is room for people making political points by civil disobedience.’ ‘These are not wicked people.’ Civil disobedience had ‘an old tradition’ in the common law world. ‘When it comes to punishment, the court should take into account their personal convictions.’ In light of this, I hope the Court shall pass a humane sentence.

Your honour, I have no regret for participating in the Umbrella Movement and the fight for democracy. It was an honour of a lifetime. I have spent the best 10 years of my youth in social movements. If I can live up to 80-year-old, I would still have 50 years to walk alongside the people of Hong Kong, to continue the fight. If this is in doubt, please test my will against the whips of criminal punishment. I shall take this as a trial of my determination. I only hope that my brothers and sisters-in-arms can be inspired whilst I am imprisoned, to do goods and encourage others. I hope they shall have further courage and strength to be honest men and women, to fight against the lies of the ruling Chinese Communist authority.

“Hope lies in the hands of the people, change starts from resistance.’ It’s only through the power of the people and direct action that the society can be changed. This was so 8 years ago. This is still the case today. May the will of the people of Hong Kong be firm and determined, to fight for democracy, overthrow the privileged, and let justice be done. All hail for freedom! All hail for democratic socialism!

May justice and peace of my Lord Jesus Christ be with me, with your Honour and with the People of Hong Kong!

Vice President of the League of Social Democrats,
the 8th Defendant of the Umbrella Movement Case

Raphael Wong Ho Ming
10th April 2019

An experimental piece of pencil and watercolor art - I tried to test if it's beneficial in any way to draw the lineart and then color the picture on two separate pieces of paper.

Tools:
- MD paper cotton sketchbook
- Animation paper
- Blackwing pencils
- Holbein Waterford cold-pressed watercolor paper (I think).
- Mijello Mission Gold pure pigments watercolors
- Tracing table (LED type)


Feel free to check out my other stuff:

Gumroad: https://gumroad.com/mateusz_urbanowicz
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mateuszurbanowicz

Website: http://mateuszurbanowicz.com
Blog: http://mattjabbar.tumblr.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/gommatt
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mateusz_urbanowicz

A little bit more laid-back video in which I not only draw a Japanese garden scene with color inks and color pencils but also test a few different color inks and go to buy a new fountain pen.

Tools:
- Pilot Custom Heritage 92
- Pilot Iroshizuku inks
- Blackwing 205
- Canson 1557 paper
- Caran d Ache supracolor II color pencils

Feel free to check out my other stuff:

Gumroad: https://gumroad.com/mateusz_urbanowicz
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mateuszurbanowicz

Website: http://mateuszurbanowicz.com
Blog: http://mattjabbar.tumblr.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/gommatt
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mateusz_urbanowicz

免費下載此影片使用的筆記：https://mteducationielts.com/course/free-improvement-course/

Disclaimer: It seems that some viewers only downloaded the notes, or watched the first part of the video and asked "why are you showing samples that aren't up to standard and teaching people to write bad essays?" This video intentionally displays some so-called "bad writing examples", in order to show how one could improve from there (which is the situation of many). Please watch the whole video in caution.
---
【相關課程：所有課程第一章節免費試讀/下載筆記】
IELTS Writing Task 1 全方位奪分精讀：https://mteducationielts.com/course/ielts-writing-task-1/
IELTS Writing Task 2試前必備衝刺精讀：https://mteducationielts.com/course/ielts-writing-task-2/
必背同義詞寶典精讀2.0：https://mteducationielts.com/course/eng-musthave-synonyms/
---
【其他IELTS相關YouTube影片】
IELTS Writing Task 1 Skills：https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5vpcD_eWFA&t=614s
IELTS Reading 5個重要小貼士 ：https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0K8a0sCQms
IELTS Reading T/F/ NG題型攻略：https://youtu.be/ms-cUZ7Whog
---
IELTS英文線上補習平台（免費試讀）：https://www.mteducationielts.com/free_resources/
HKDSE線上補習平台（免費試讀）：https://www.mteducationhk.com/free_resources/
---
Melody Tam資歷：
- HKDSE 7科5**狀元，包括中英文科均4卷5**，選修科 (Biology, Chemistry, Economics) 分數大幅度拋離5**的最低要求
- 17歲時第一次應考雅思 (IELTS) 便取得滿分9分成績
- 一級榮譽畢業於香港中文大學修讀環球商業學 (Global Business)，總GPA達3.9/4.0，曾獲得多個獎學金及入選院長嘉許名單
- 曾於多家金融機構及投資銀行實習，尚未畢業已獲大型美資投行聘請為全職投資銀行分析師 (Investment Banking Analyst)
---
Instagram: melodytamhkdse
Email: admin@mteducationhk.com
WhatsApp (admin): 852 6049 1152