立即捐款
ads

媒體

Take it to the UN!

廣告

廣告

看了網民這則標題,很喜歡:《影視處再發神功,今次輪到獨立媒體》。影視處這次在一宗投訴下,便向獨立媒體作出勸喻,那收到二千宗投訴的聖經呢?

獨立媒體是本地最主要的公民媒體,主導著多次本地保育運動,多次和政府的發展政策相扞格;在天星抗爭時,更成唯一的訊息源,為主流媒體所無法比擬。其成員不乏學界、文化界人物,如葉蔭驄、梁文道等。這次因為一幅人體藝術照,便作出勸喻,明顯是出於它一直作為新社運基地的角色,藉辭打壓。

對於影視處各式各樣的荒謬之舉,我們還可以保持某程度的克制;但若然它被政府利用為打擊異己的武器,則決不能容許--我們的行動有必要升級。請各位copy 下文,電郵到下面地址:

[email protected]  - 聯合國人權理事會,並CC到:

[email protected]  - 香港特首辦

[email protected]  - 蘋果日報

[email protected]  - 明報

[email protected]  - South China Morning Post

如你不打算cc 到理事會以外的機構,請記得把上款更改;在信裡還有地方需要填上:最尾的署名。另外,請尊重聯合國,切勿同一人使用多個電郵郵寄。

電郵標題:

投诉:香港违反《公民权利及政治权利国际公約》/ Complain: the violation of "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" in Hong kong

內文:

致:联合国人权理事会

夹附:

香港特別行政区特首办公室;

苹果日报;

明报

南华早报

To : Human Rights Council of United Nations

CC to: Office of the Chief Executive Hong Kong Special Administrative Region People's Republic of China;

Apple Daily news;

Ming Pao news;

South China Morning Post;

投诉:香港违反《公民权利及政治权利国际公約》/ Complain: the violation of "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" in Hong kong

(Original: Chinese; Please scroll down for English version)

本人欲向贵机构投诉香港特別行政区政府违反《公民权利及政治权利国际公約》(下称公約) 第十四条及十九条。根据香港政府200729日的立法文件CB(2)1014/06-07 (03)号文件 [1] 第五段指出,该公約适用於香港。

根据《公約》第十四条,法律应平等地对待每个个体。但近日香港之司法机构淫亵物品审裁署 (下称审裁署) 卻不能提供公平公开公正之审讯。

就香港的程序而言,影视及娛乐事务管理处 (下称影视处) 主动发现不雅物品或收到有关投诉后,会把有关个案转介给审裁署按照香港法例第390章《淫亵及不雅物品管制条例》(下称管制条例) 进行评级。工商及科技管理局的现任局长,王永平先生亦於2006716日之香港政府新闻公佈中指出,「影视处负责执行法例,审裁处则评定物品类別。」[2]香港大学法律学院院长陈文敏亦表示,《管制条例》只赋予评审权力审裁处,其他机构並不享有该权力[3]

阁下应该己知悉近日香港有超过二千宗投诉指圣经不雅[4]。然而影视处卻沒有遵守其仅为执行机构的身份,拦截了圣经在香港司法制度下得到公平公开公正之审讯的机会。加上影视处对最近多宗事例之不同处理手法,本人怀疑影视处及审裁署,已成为言论审查、打擊異见者的工具--此举同时违反了《公約》第十九条对言论自由之保障。

根据本地报章苹果日报於2007519日报导,影视处由2001一年至今,共批出了132个项目推广《管制条例》,牵涉款项达570万港元,其中一半批给一个名为「明光社」的基督教组织[5]。该组织极力宣传反人权言论,如曾把同性恋者妖魔化为滥交者、生活腐化者,「同时有眾多性伴侶,有些甚至多於百位性伴侶」[6]。另一方面,香港无線电線明珠台亦指出,该组织一直接受教育统筹局的资助,推广「人权经常被用来挑战传统社会」的人权教育[7]

一般认为,近年香港发生多次的事件,均是由这个组织主导,如指责香港电台节目《同志.恋人》的只描写同志恋人族群生活情況为「不平衡报道」[8]。而经未经证实的消息指出,最近对中大学生报的投诉,亦是由这组识发动[9]

528日,影视处对一个网站作出劝喻,並指可能会把个案交由警方跟进,因为有一宗投诉指该网站贴出一幅人体藝术照[8]。该网站是本地一著名的公民媒体,主导了多次本地的保育、反剝削工人运动,並反驳提议「版权人可直接、毋需向法庭申请,就可向互联网服务供应商索取用戶私隐资料」的《在数码环境下保护知识產权》[11] 的政府咨询文件。

因此本人开始认为,最近被审裁处评定为不雅的中文大学学生报情色问卷,不单纯是再一次像把大卫像评为不雅的愚蠢之举[12]。该刊物的四月号,第二页报导警方出动大批便衣警员监视一次遊行、第三页报导政府出动四十辆警车、三百名警员监视人数相若的示威者,第五、六页指责香港政府扶贫政策的偽善、第八页批评香港把公营机构私有化,第十三、十四页记錄一次和政府对抗的保育运动。这次审裁处的判決,明显是一次对《公約》第十九条所保障「寻找、接受及传递各种资讯和理念」的权利的侵害。尽管《公約》亦指出,道德亦应是考虑的范围,但各联合国委员可自行参考该份问题问卷,或东南西北网对爭议问卷问题的英文翻译版本[13],估计道德标準是否适用於该问卷。另外,本人的母语是汉语,认为该网站使用"would you like to" 的译法,较西方媒体使用的"whether they had fantasized" 準确。

对於香港大规模地投诉圣经,本人並不否认当中不少人是出於对宗教的恶意攻擊。但本人还认为,这同时是对香港政府当局能否公正公平的一次考验。但影视处卻越权拒絕把圣经送交审裁处,声称投诉是恶作剧,不禁今人思疑影视处等政府部门和该基督教组织之关系。影视处此举己引起大量的不满。不少人己透过电邮向香港申诉专员公署投诉影视处滥用权力,但他们接到的居然是一连几天的伺服器故障的回覆[14]

另外,部份不满者亦以大量投诉名著的方法表达不满,其中涉及的作品包括可兰经、莎士比亚文集、格林童话[15]。但在523日,审裁处把明报中一份由学者执笔,模拟问题问卷的可能答法的报导批定为不雅[16],在528日,对上面提及过的网站作出劝喻,都反映著香港政府至今还以影视署作为言论审查、打擊異见者的工具。

本人现希望贵机构关注有关情況。

1) 该文件中文版可以以下位址下载:http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr06-07/chinese/panels/ha/papers/ha0209cb2-1014-...

2) 工商及科技局局长发表《香港家书》。网上位址为:http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/200607/15/P200607140113.htm

3) 《「符道德标準」圣经不送检。法律学者:影视处越权裁断可被覆核》,雅虎转载明报新闻,网上位址为:http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070517/12/27o63.html

4) "Bible is 'too sexual', complain hundreds in Hong Kong" - Daily Mail 新闻,网上位址为:

5) 《不送审《圣经》惹利益输送之嫌,影视处被揭资助教会团体》

6) 《医护人员联署声明,男性之间的性接触对公共卫生的风险》,网上位址为:http://www.truth-light.org.hk/form/news-mingpao-sign.jpg

7) 标题不明,但可以下述网站观看有中文字幕的版本:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pTUZ1E-GwE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzVbI9wn3dU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6WhEM6hW9U

8)《广播事务管理局二零零七年一月二十日会议新闻稿 》网上位址为:http://www.hkba.hk/cn/press/20070120c.html

9)《中大勾结明光社之谜,学生报风波的政治內幕 》网上位址为:http://www.inmediahk.net/public/article?item_id=217009&group_id=11

10) 事件经过见:http://www.inmediahk.net/public/article?item_id=222202;该人体藝术照位见:http://www.flickr.com/photos/ioerror/102819914/

11) 该文件中文版可以以下位址下载:http://www.citb.gov.hk/cib/chtml/pdf/consultation/Consultation_document_...

12) 1995年,高院推翻审裁署对一幅刊有大卫像的照片为不雅的判词,见:http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=33438&cu...

13) 见:http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200705.brief.htm#064

14) 见下列网址

Apple daily

http://lightnesssnow.hkbloggers.org/?p=440#comment-18568

http://forum.hkgolden.com/view.asp?message=939060

15) 《莎剧童话金瓶梅,港掀投诉潮,《东方日报》风月版13宗投诉內容不雅》,雅虎转载明报新闻,网上位址为http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070518/12/27r62.html

16) 该报导为 《周日话题﹕情色问卷,三种答案》,该报导已被明报从网页上除下。Google 的库页存档


相关报导有 《明报转载情色版暂列不雅》,为雅虎转载明报新闻,网上位址为:http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070523/12/281f7.html

English Version

I am writing to you, the Committees of Human Right Council of United Nation, to complain about the violation of "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" (ICCPR) by the Hong Kong SAR (HKSAR) Government . The ICCPR has been ratified by the HK SAR government, according to the document CB(2) 1014/06-07 (03) form the Legislative Council of HKSAR[1].

According to the Article 14 of ICCPR, "All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals." But equal, open and just trial is lacking in the Obscene Articles Tribunal (OAT), a judicial section under the HKSAR.

In the process of handling a case of indecent articles, The Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority (TELA) of HKSAR shall refer the disputed item, which is discovered by themselves or of which they have received complaint, to the OAT and the OAT shall estimate whether the item is indecent according the "Control of Obscene and Indecent Articles Ordinace" (COIAO), chapter 390 of HKSAR law. "TELA enforces the law, while the OAT made judgement" said Joseph W P Wong, the secretary for Commerce, Industry and Technology Bureau, in a government press in 16 July, 2006 [2]. Professor Johannes M M Chan, the dean of the Faculty of Law of the University of Hong Kong, also indicated that only the OAT was given the power to estimate item by COIAO, no any other institution share this power [3].

It is well-known that there are over 2,000 people filed complaint on the violence and incest content of the Holy Book to the TELA[4], but TELA had blocked the complaint to enter the judicial process which is an apparent abuse of power. As some other cases have been treated differently, I doubt the TELA and OAT have been used as a tool in the censorship of speech against dissents -- it has also violated the article 19 of ICCPR which protects the freedom of speech.

TELA have, according to the news of local newspaper Apple Daily in 19 May, 2007, has given financial assistance to the 132 projects, involving 5.7 million Hong Kong dollar, for promoting the COAIO since 2001, half of them are given to a Christian organization called "The Society for Truth and Light"[5]. The organization often makes anti-human rights speeches, such as demonizing the homosexual people is the one having "a lot of sex partners, some of them have even more than hundred" they said [6]. On the other hand, Channel Pearl, the English channel of TVB, have disclosed that the organization are also providing a human right education training to teacher, sponsored by the Education and Manpower Bureau of HKSAR[7], which distorted the very notion of human rights, saying that the human rights is used to "challenge the traditional social system."[7].

Generally, this organization have been regarded as the originator to the affair occurred recently, such as filing a complain on a RTHK programme reporting the life of the homosexual as "impartial"[8]. The complaint against the Chinese University Student Press (CUSP) is, reportedly, also filed by them[9].

On 28 May, 2007, TELA have advised a website and claim that they may refer the case to police, for it contains a nude photo[10]. This website is a famous civil media in Hong Kong, conducting lot of events involving civil rights struggling, including protecting the cultural heritage, exploitation of workers, and criticizing the consultation document by government which suggest that "the copyright holders can get the personal private data from the internet service provider without Court's permission."[11]

So, I am not considering the recent judgement to the sexual questionnaire of CUSP is just a stupidity which similar to judge the statue of David by Michelangelo as indecent in Hong Kong [12]. In the page 2 of April version of CUSP reports, they have published a number of plain clothed polices mixed in a rally for monitoring the demonstrators; in page 3, it reports that there were 40 police vehicles and 300 polices monitoring a same amount of people who were marching;, in page5 and 6 it criticized the hypocrisy of the poverty policy; in page 8, it criticized the government's privatization of the publicly-owned institution; in page 13-14 it recorded a struggle for the preservation of cultural heritage against the government development project. It is obvious that the judgement of CUSP has the effect of repressing the dissent voice. It has violated the article 19 of ICCPR which protect the rights "to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds". Despite the fact that morality is also the criterion, but you, the Committees of Human Right Council, could find out whether the CUSP is indecent --even though you don't read Chinese, zonaeuropa.com have translated the two most critical section to English[13]-- by yourself. And in the view of Chinese native speaker, the phrase "would you like to" translated by zonaeuropa is more accurate than "whether they had fantasized" the western-media usually used.

It is insensible to deny that some of complaints of the Holy Book are hostile attacking. But I observe it today, not a farce of Hong Kong, but an examination of freedom-- symbolizing an end, as well as a beginning-- signifying renewal, as well as change. The unlawful refusal in handing the case to OAT by the TELA makes one doubt the relation between TELA and the organization mentioned above . Hundreds have sent their E-mail complaint to the Office of the Ombudsman, but all they got in return was an E-mail notification mentioning server error that lasts for days[14].

And there are some people expressing their discontent by filing complaint on famous literature, including Qur'an, Shakespeare, Grimm's fairy, and etc.[15], but the government ignore the wrongs they done and still are using the TELA to censor information of dissents, insofar as they judged a article of a local newspaper Ming Pao which re-answer the CUSP's questionnaire for opening up other possibilities in the discussion of CUSP questionnaire in 23 May, 2007[16], and the advice by the TELA to the website was made in 28 May, 2007.

I hope that the HRC of UN could concern the recent trend of Hong Kong.

Notes:

1) The document(in Chinese) are available in following address: http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr06-07/chinese/panels/ha/papers/ha0209cb2-1014-...

2) The press entitled "工商及科技局局长发表《香港家书》", available in following address(in Chinese): http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/200607/15/P200607140113.htm

3) The news entitled "「符道德标準」圣经不送检。法律学者:影视处越权裁断可被覆核" of Ming Pao , via Yahoo!, available in following address (in Chinese): http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070517/12/27o63.html

4) "Bible is 'too sexual', complain hundreds in Hong Kong" - Daily Mail newsavailable in following address(in English):

5) The news entitled "不送审《圣经》惹利益输送之嫌,影视处被揭资助教会团体", available in following address(in Chinese)

6) The declaration entitled "医护人员联署声明,男性之间的性接触对公共卫生的风险", available in following address(in Chinese): http://www.truth-light.org.hk/form/news-mingpao-sign.jpg

7) Title unknown, available in following address (in English, subtitle with Chinese):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pTUZ1E-GwE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzVbI9wn3dU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6WhEM6hW9U

8) "Press Release for the Broadcasting Authority Meeting on 20 January 2007", available in following address(in English):

9) The news entitled "中大勾结明光社之谜,学生报风波的政治內幕 , available in following address(in Chinese): http://www.inmediahk.net/public/article?item_id=217009&group_id=11

10) For the detail, see (in Chinese): http://www.inmediahk.net/public/article?item_id=222202; for the nude photo, see: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ioerror/102819914/

11) The document(in Chinese) are available in following address: http://www.citb.gov.hk/cib/chtml/pdf/consultation/Consultation_document_...

12) The Verdict made by the High Court which reverse the judgement that Daivd is indecent in 1995(in English), see: http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=33438&cu...

13) see: http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200705.brief.htm#064

14) see following website (in Chinese):

Apple daily

http://lightnesssnow.hkbloggers.org/?p=440#comment-18568

http://forum.hkgolden.com/view.asp?message=939060

15) The news entitled "莎剧童话金瓶梅,港掀投诉潮,《东方日报》风月版13宗投诉內容不雅" of Ming Pao, via Yahoo!, available in following address (in Chinese): http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070518/12/27r62.html

16) The article, which entitled "周日话题﹕情色问卷,三种答案", had been deleted from the website, But Google have the cache, see (in Chinese)


The news about the judgement have made, can see the article which entitled "明报转载情色版暂列不雅"Ming Pao, via Yahoo!, available in following address (in Chinese): http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070523/12/281f7.html

Your name

Hong Kong citizen

Date

E-mail: XXX

For more information or contact information UN may be require, UN official are welcome to contact me.

經作者同意,轉載自 http://lathk.mysinablog.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=605598

廣告