惹過官非的社運人士，肯定對條子作供陳容鼎盛的畫面印象深刻︰「科學館飯盒」案，作供陣容既有署理總督察也有警員；「六四踢保」案，兩粒花、三粒花群星拱照；「奶粉恐襲中聯辦」案，一個總督察帶住兩個 PC 出庭作證 …… 何以在這次，當站上被告席的是退休沙展，控方就一個警察都不傳召，甚至連負責下決定落 charge 的調查警員也不用作證？
須知道，楊志偉並不是當場被捕，而是警方事後「秋後算帳」拘控的；毫無疑問，調查案件的警官必然是從片段、口供等資料，得出被告具備襲擊的 Mens Rea 的結論，才會決定檢控的；而要證明被告的致罪意念，難道警方人員的證據，竟只是可有可無？
據了解，控方曾經在庭上詢問受害人是否認為被告「有惡意」。若控方真的試圖在案情中證明被告有「惡意 (malice)」，這無疑是解錯了法律，自己無端提高了檢控難度的門檻︰襲擊罪根本不用太仔細地深究被告的意圖 (intent)，而只須證明被告的暴力行為，是否故意或罔顧後果已經足夠；何況，「惡意」這詞彙在刑事程序中，其實相當 technical，一般市民也未必能充分掌握箇中意涵，如果控方以為從受害人口中得出「惡意」就足以證明 Mens Rea，那這位檢控人員可真是不夠格。
事已至此，既然控方的表現是如此差勁、舉證如此 hea 爆無力，其實律政司要上訴，恐怕也是徒勞無功；若硬要在練官的裁決中找出一星半點「法律觀點錯誤」來申請「以案件呈述方式上訴 (appeal by way of case stated)」，或者可以考慮提出，練官既已裁定，不排除被告想「推開記者的鏡頭」，對一個手持拍攝工具的人出手推其鏡頭，理應起碼已經符合 "causing victim's apprehension of immediate violence" 的定義；而既然練官認為被告有關記者那部分的說辭牽強，高院應考慮證據後重新作出有罪裁決。
Let Development and Nature be in Harmony Public Consultation before introduction of New Policies detrimental to Green Belts
In the recent Policy Address, the housing problem of Hong Kong is again attributed to the lack of land. The Government stresses time and time again the importance of increasing land supply. It seems that once there is exploitation of land, housing problems will be solved. Apart from its "brilliant" plans of reclamation and development of new towns, the Government also came up with an idea of changing the land use of our green belts.
According to the Policy Address, the Government is taking steps to rezone sites in Green Belt areasfor residential use. It is stressed that these areas are "devegetated, deserted or formed". However, some of those designated areas are in fact covered with vegetation and with a significant number of trees. It is worrying that such policy would make the environment of the urban fringe worse and promote further encroachment of the natural environment by urban development.
As we all know, trees plays a vital role in improving our air quality and in alleviating Heat Island Effect. Green Belt zones also serve as a buffer between urban areas and country parks. According to the Town Planning Board Guidelines, the planning intention of Green Belt zones is "to conserve the existing natural environment amid the built-up areas/at the urban fringe" and "to define the limits of urban and sub-urban development areas by natural features, so as to safeguard the natural environment from the encroachment by urban type development". Also, they prevent urban sprawl and provide recreational outlets. Most importantly, the Town Planning Board has imposed a general presumption against development on Green Belt zones.
To our astonishment, in its zealous search of land, the Government picks the Green Belt zones. It clearly contravenes the long established planning principles. There should be a public consultation before such drastic change of policy, in order to set out defined regulations to minimize any adverse environmental impact brought about by developing deserted Green Belt zones. Since Green Belt zones are of so much importance to our city, the Government should review the reasons why some of the Green Belts has become deserted and to restore, but not building on them. Vegetation on private lands zoned as Green Belt may in fact be deliberately destroyed in order to become deserted and devegetated for easier approval of development.
Let's imagine that the Government has now fulfilled the 470,000 housing target. Maybe we finally could secure a place to live. But we have lost a beautiful living environment, public open spaces and green areas. When there are holidays, we are stuck with similar shopping malls. Chief Executive C.Y. Leung has long stressed(s) that Hong Kong people should "live better" in the future. It is true that we need flats to live in. But what we want is a lively and green living environment, not a concrete forest.
Whenever there are housing targets and development needs have to be met, the natural and ecological environment is often the victim. However, it is only because the Government depicts a confrontational picture between development and (the) nature. Facing the housing needs of the general public, the Government simply adopts linear thinking to increase land supply. Publicly-suggested sites including parts of barracks, golf courses and the Brown Zones are never mentioned. It is also disappointing that the governmental discussion on housing problems never touches upon its policy on population. We urge the Government to review its suggested development on Green Belt zones and to give a constructive response towards the public's suggestions on policy of land, housing and population.
(This is the translation of the Chinese version.)
You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.
Elle說自己甚少聽香港流行曲，充其量也只聽my little airport一類獨立音樂。「其實我也有嘗試走成熟穩重路線！可是每次寫出來也被認為是『小清新』！」她以「得得意意」來形容自己的曲風，也不抗拒被冠上「小清新」的標籤。「有時候寫歌，本來構想時也打算試試『知性曲風』，怎知道出來的結果還是低低能能。」她笑說自己還是不適合成熟的風格，只好作罷，並把這種柔和結他聲與甜美聲線的配搭，視為獨有的風格。