【新增梁家傑批評】
去年律政司司長鄭若驊最「傑出」表現是在反修例運動中律政司被質疑濫告，抑或到英國外訪時遇示威跌倒受傷後獲安排「送中」到北京治療？相信大家心中有數，而在她心目中卻是有關中港仲裁等安排，她在法律年度開啟禮致辭時詳述律政司去年取得包括上述的「主要成就」，「法治」當然也有談，但不是關乎引來打破中港司法分隔的《逃犯修訂》條例質疑、亦非政府被指違憲引用《緊急法》推《禁止蒙面規例》，而是針對反修例運動中的「暴行」，聲言「在亂局下，暴力橫行，破壞行為猖獗，那就是暴徒統治而不是法治」，反覆強調「權利不是必然絕對的，而是可能受到限制」；對司法獨立及警員破壞法治的行為，絕口不提。

今天現身法律年開啟禮的鄭若驊已拆除左手的護帶，她於致辭時指去年香港經歷了動盪不休及極之艱難的日子，「許多香港的核心價值都飽受衝擊，大家最重視的核心價值『法治』也不例外」，指法治內涵言人人殊，「有些是發人深省的不變真理；有些則不過是憑空想像或是誤導性的謬見」，強調權利非必然絕對，可能要受到限制，繼而指斥亂局下暴力橫行，「破壞行為猖獗，那就是暴徒統治而不是法治」。

她刻意提及為免警員在互聯網平台被起底及滋擾，高院在頒令繼續執行相應的臨時禁制令時指出：「重複和不斷升級的違法行為在情理上是沒有可能促進和維持法治」，而「干犯這類罪行的人，稱之為『罪犯』也不為過。犯罪活動不會純粹因為犯事者自以為基於某個特定或可能更崇高的原因行事，便變成不是犯罪活動」。

她在演詞中細數今年取得的「主要成就」，除了聲言繼續為政府就各種各樣的事宜提供坦誠、獨立及專業的法律意見，使其充分了解所牽涉的法律問題，並且嚴格依法行事，亦指已按照《基本法》規定，嚴肅履行主管刑事檢控工作的憲制角色，不受任何干涉，堅稱「所有檢控決定都是在考慮所得證據、適用法律及《檢控守則》所載的原則後所作出」，間接反駁濫告指控；繼而又細數去年簽訂的包括《關於內地與香港特別行政區法院相互認可和執行民商事案件判決的安排》，指香港其中一些與知識產權有關的判決將可在內地得以執行，自豪這是「唯一一個有這種安排的司法管轄區」等。

雖然被要求下台之聲不絕，但鄭若驊仍然滿腹大計要推行，預告今年是據《中華人民共和國憲法》制定的《基本法》頒佈30周年，律政司會舉辦研討會紀念，同時會推出名為「願景2030—聚焦法治」的10年計劃，旨在透過研究、持份者互相合作和能力建設探討法治的各個元素，推廣對法治的正確理解和認識，從而在本地以至國際層面促進共融和公平社會的可持續發展。

資深大律師、公民黨主席梁家傑批評鄭若驊對法治精神刻意作膚淺的理解，僅一再譴責暴力、批評示威者違法，梁反駁：「日日違法嘅行為，體現喺警暴濫打、濫捕又冇後果」，令外界感覺警隊受縱容及包庇，情況同樣不符合法治，「政權要人民守法，但就日日以不同形式違法，以法治人，咁你根本冇道德力量、政治認受性叫人守法」，梁指人民授權政府立法、執法，但政權卻讓法律淪為保住自己權力的工具。

終審法院首席法官、各位司法機構人員、大律師公會主席、律師會會長、各位嘉賓、各位女士、各位先生：

法治

　　如今正好是反思去年，並且計劃前路的時候。香港在二○一九年經歷了動盪不休和極之艱難的日子。許多香港的核心價值都飽受衝擊，大家最重視的核心價值「法治」也不例外。法治的內涵言人人殊，有些是發人深省的不變真理；有些則不過是憑空想像或是誤導性的謬見。評價法治實行情況的方法很多，有些是基於主觀感覺，也有些是基於客觀指標。

　　法治的正確概念可以從以下兩項權威論述得知：

　　已故的兵咸勳爵（Lord Bingham）在其啓發人心的著作《法治》（Rule of Law）一書中，把法治的核心概念總結為﹕「國家內所有人和權力機關，不論公營或私營，都應當受法律約束，並有權享有法律帶來的裨益。法律必須公開制定，（一般）只在將來生效，並在法院公開施行」。

　　二○一二年《聯合國大會國內和國際的法治問題高級別會議宣言》確認「推進法治，對於實現持續和包容性經濟增長、可持續發展、消除貧困與飢餓以及充分實現所有人權和基本自由來說，至關重要」。

　　由於法治元素的內涵必然涉及廣泛層面。在此，我希望重點指出其中一些實質和程序的層面。

法治的實質層面

　　正如迪普洛克大法官（Lord Diplock）認為：「接納法治作為憲法原則，要求公民在採取任何行動前都應該能事先知悉隨之而來的法律後果」。法律必須方便查閱、能被理解、穩定、具預測性和公平，使任何社會均可以持續發展。《基本法》訂明了香港的法律基礎架構。我們的法例以淺白的語言寫成，並且可以在電子版香港法例網站上查閱。我們的案例也上載到互聯網，方便公眾查閱。

　　訴訟難免涉及對立的權利。然而，權利不是必然絕對的，而是可能受到限制。正如上訴法庭在律政司司長訴黃之鋒及其他人一案中提醒：「若只是强調個人權利而不顧及守法，人們很容易自以為是，只看重自己的權益，而漠視別人和社會整體的權益，社會便很容易陷入紛亂」。

　　在亂局下，暴力橫行，破壞行為猖獗，那就是暴徒統治而不是法治。為免警務人員在互聯網平台被起底及滋擾，高等法院在頒令繼續執行相應的臨時禁制令時指出：「重複和不斷升級的違法行為在情理上是沒有可能促進和維持法治」，而「干犯這類罪行的人，稱之為『罪犯』也不為過。犯罪活動不會純粹因為犯事者自以為基於某個特定或可能更崇高的原因行事，便變成不是犯罪活動」。」

　　薩克斯法官（Lord Sachs）在R v Caird & Others一案中也認為：「有說法指社會上部份堅信某套觀點的人結成一夥，干擾另一部份對於該套觀點感覺不如他們那般强烈或持不同觀點的人的合法活動，是理所當然的事。任何此等說法均不能容忍，必須毫不猶豫地予以駁斥」。

法治的程序層面

　　公平審訊和正當程序是法治在程序層面的必要元素，而司法機構的角色舉足輕重。正如終審法院馬道立首席法官於二○一五年在英格蘭及威爾斯大律師公會國際法治講座指出，在具透明度的法律制度下，社會能夠觀察得知，獨立的司法機構是「以無懼、無偏、無私、無欺的精神主持正義」，並且提供附有理由的判案書，作為依照法律及其精神作出判決的佐證，彰顯法治的存在。

　　廖柏嘉勳爵（Lord Neuberger）在與英國脫歐有關一案中對司法機構的角色提出的看法，與上述分析可謂相輔相成：「從最廣義來說，司法機構負責維護和促進法治；具體而言，對訴諸法庭的每宗案件，法官都不偏不倚地確認和應用相關法律。」

律政司在二○一九年取得的主要成就

　　律政司在二○一九年繼續為政府就各種各樣的事宜提供坦誠、獨立及專業的法律意見，使其充分了解所牽涉的法律問題，並且嚴格依法行事。除了在公法訴訟和民事申索中代表政府外，律政司也致力確保政府的政策和立法建議符合《基本法》及本港法律制度的其他基本原則。此外，律政司按照《基本法》第六十三條的規定，嚴肅履行主管刑事檢控工作的憲制角色，不受任何干涉；所有檢控決定都是在考慮所得證據、適用法律及《檢控守則》所載的原則後所作出。為了使得瀏覽法例更為方便，律政司繼續提升電子版香港法例資料庫的功能，並在資料庫發布更多法例的經核證文本。

　　此外，我們已實行多項新措施。由於時間關係，我在此只能列舉當中數項。

　　我們在二○一九年十一月第一個星期舉行首個年度香港法律周，該項活動有來自超過30個司法管轄區的法律專家參加。

　　香港在「一國兩制」政策下具有獨特優勢，現舉兩個示例說明：

　　其一是開創新格局並具突破意義的《關於內地與香港特別行政區法院就仲裁程序相互協助保全的安排》。這項安排善用國家在《十三五規劃綱要》內闡述的國家政策，並且意識到在「兩制」下法律及仲裁的不同之處。這項安排令香港成為內地以外首個及至今唯一一個司法管轄區，在作為仲裁地時，由合資格仲裁機構管理仲裁程序的當事人可向內地法院申請保全措施。

　　其二是《關於內地與香港特別行政區法院相互認可和執行民商事案件判決的安排》。這項安排在二○一九年一月簽訂，可執行判決的範圍較二○一九年七月二日通過的《海牙判決公約》更廣泛。在此安排生效後，香港其中一些與知識產權有關的判決將可在內地得以執行，是唯一一個有這種安排的司法管轄區。

　　在中央政府的支持下，律政司與聯合國國際貿易法委員會在法律周舉行期間簽訂了諒解備忘錄，確定雙方合辦兩年一度的亞太司法高峯會議的安排，並探討進一步合作。

　　在《粵港澳大灣區發展規劃綱要》公布後，廣東省、香港和澳門的法律部門在二○一九年九月建立聯席會議制度，在政府層面合作推展三方關注的項目。律政司推行的其他措施包括與海牙國際私法會議合辦全球首個有關二○一九年七月通過的《海牙判決公約》的國際研討會，以及把「調解為先」這個香港品牌推廣到其他司法管轄區。

　　律政司推行的大量專業工作和各項措施，若沒有我的同事們專心致志，克盡厥職，實在不可能成事。在此，我對他們表示感謝。

二○二○年的新措施

　　二○二○年標誌着根據《中華人民共和國憲法》制定的《基本法》頒布30周年。律政司將會舉辦研討會以誌紀念。

　　其他新措施包括舉辦政府間會議和研討會，以提升香港的國際地位。

　　尤其重要的是，律政司將會推出名為「願景2030 —聚焦法治」的十年計劃。這項措施旨在透過研究、持份者互相合作和能力建設探討法治的各個元素，推廣對法治的正確理解和認識，從而在本地以至國際層面促進共融和公平社會的可持續發展。

結語

　　終審法院馬道立首席法官將於明年一月榮休，這是他最後一次主持法律年度開啓典禮。馬道立法官對法治建樹良多，又不遺餘力地為香港司法機構招攬和挽留頂尖的專業人才，確保司法工作得以進行。對此，我謹代表律政司向他衷心致謝。

　　最後，祝您們和您們的家人有一個快樂平安的新年。謝謝各位。

Chief Justice, Members of the Judiciary, Chairman of the Bar Association, President of the Law Society, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Rule of Law

This is a time of reflection on the past year and also to plan ahead. The state of turmoil in Hong Kong in 2019 has put us through the most difficult times. Many of the core values of Hong Kong have been under challenge and the core value closest to our hearts, the rule of law, is no exception. There are many intimations of what constitutes the rule of law – some may be described as perpetual truths and inspirational whilst others imaginative or even misleading. There are many ways by which the practice of the rule of law is to be assessed, some based on subjective perception while others on objective indicia.

Two authoritative statements inform us the correct concept:

The late Lord Bingham's inspiring book, the Rule of Law, summarised the core idea as "all persons and authorities within the state, whether public or private, should be bound by and entitled to the benefit of laws publicly made, taking effect (generally) in the future and publicly administered in the courts" (Note 1).

The Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the United Nations' General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels in 2012 recognised that "the advancement of the rule of law is essential for sustained and inclusive economic growth, sustainable development, the eradication of poverty and hunger and the full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms" (Note 2).

Given the broad perspective that the rule of law necessarily entails, I seek to highlight some of its substantive and procedural aspects.

Substantive Aspects of the Rule of Law

As held by Lord Diplock, "[t]he acceptance of the rule of law as a constitutional principle requires that a citizen, before committing himself to any course of action, should be able to know in advance what are the legal consequences that will flow from it" (Note 3). The law must be accessible, intelligible, stable, predictable and fair for the sustainable development of any society. In Hong Kong, our legal infrastructure is set out in the Basic Law. Our legislation is in plain language and accessible at the HKeL website. Our case law is also readily accessible to the public on the internet.

Litigation inevitably involves competing rights. Yet, rights are not necessarily absolute and may be subject to restrictions. As the Court of Appeal stated in Secretary for Justice v Wong Chi Fung and Others (Note 4), "if the individual's rights are over-emphasised at the expense of observing the law, people will easily become self-serving, with little regard for other people's rights and the overall interests of society, so that society is prone to fall into disarray."

When disarray such as unchecked acts of violence and vandalism prevails, it will be rule of mob, not rule of law. In ordering the continuation of an interim injunction to restrain doxxing and harassment against police officers on internet-based platform, the High Court reminded that "the promotion and maintenance of the rule of law is not sensibly or rationally pursued by repeated and escalating breaches of the law" (Note 5), and "[p]ersons who commit such crimes are simply, and properly described as, 'criminals'. Criminal activity does not cease to be criminal activity simply because the actor believes himself or herself to be acting for a particular, perhaps higher, cause" (Note 6).

In R v Caird & Others (Note 7), Lord Sachs also held that "[a]ny suggestion that a section of the community strongly holding one set of views is justified in banding together to disrupt the lawful activities of a section that does not hold the same views so strongly or which holds different views cannot be tolerated and must unhesitatingly be rejected."

Procedural Aspects of the Rule of Law

Fair trial and due process are essential elements of the procedural aspects of the rule of law. The judiciary plays the pivotal role. As observed by Chief Justice Ma in the International Rule of Law Lecture of the Bar Council of England and Wales back in 2015, a transparent system of law in which the community can observe that the independent judiciary "administer[s] justice without fear or favour, self-interest or deceit", with reasoned judgments available as evidence that the adjudication is in accordance with the law and its spirit, indicates the existence of the rule of law (Note 8).

Lord Neuberger's holding on the role of the judiciary in the Brexit case completes the analysis, "In the broadest sense, the role of the judiciary is to uphold and further the rule of law; more particularly, judges impartially identify and apply the law in every case brought before the courts" (Note 9).

Key Achievements of DoJ in 2019

In 2019, the Department continues to provide honest, independent and professional legal advice on a wide spectrum of matters to the Government so that it is fully apprised of the legal implications and acts strictly in accordance with the law. Apart from representing the Government in public law litigation and civil claims, the Department endeavours to ensure that government policies and legislative proposals comply with the Basic Law as well as other fundamental principles of our legal system. The Department also takes seriously its constitutional role of controlling criminal prosecutions, free from any interference under Article 63 of the Basic Law, and all prosecutorial decisions are made after taking into account the available evidence, applicable laws and the principles set out in the Prosecution Code. To facilitate more convenient access to the laws of Hong Kong, the Department continues to enhance the HKeL database, with more laws as verified version published on it.

On top of that, we have taken a number of new initiatives and in the interest of time, only a few will be mentioned here.

The inaugural annual Hong Kong Legal Week was held in the first week of November 2019, with participating legal experts from over 30 jurisdictions.

This year two examples showcase the unique benefits of the "one country, two systems" policy to Hong Kong.

First, the game-changing and ground-breaking Arrangement between Hong Kong and the Mainland Concerning Mutual Assistance in Court-ordered Interim Measures in Aid of Arbitral Proceedings. It capitalises on the national policy of China in its "Outline of the 13th Five-Year Plan", and recognises the difference of the "two systems" in the legal and arbitration context. This Arrangement has made Hong Kong the first and only jurisdiction outside Mainland China where, as a seat of arbitration, parties to arbitral proceedings administered by eligible arbitral institutions can apply to the Mainland courts for interim measures.

The second is the Arrangement between Hong Kong and the Mainland on Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, which was concluded in January 2019. The scope of enforcement of this Arrangement goes beyond the Hague Judgments Convention of July 2, 2019. Once in force, Hong Kong will be the only jurisdiction where certain intellectual property (IP) related judgments would be enforceable in the Mainland.

With the support from the Central People's Government, the Department entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law during the Legal Week to confirm the co-organisation of the Asia Pacific Judicial Summit on a biennial basis and to explore further collaboration.

In the wake of the promulgation of the Outline Development Plan of the Greater Bay Area, the legal departments in Guangdong Province, Hong Kong and Macao, established a joint conference mechanism in September 2019 to work on projects of mutual interest at the government level. Other initiatives of the Department include co-organising with the Hague Conference on Private International Law the Inaugural Global Conference on the Hague Judgments Convention concluded last July, and exporting the Hong Kong brand, "Mediate First", to other jurisdictions.

The vast amount of professional work and the initiatives of the Department would not have been possible without the dedication and hard work of my colleagues for which I am most grateful.

New Initiatives of 2020

2020 marks the 30th anniversary for the proclamation of the Basic Law under the Constitution of the People's Republic of China. The Department will organise a conference to commemorate this.

Other new initiatives include the organisation of inter-governmental meetings and conferences to enhance our international stature.

Importantly, the Department will launch a 10-year project entitled, "Vision 2030 for Rule of Law". This initiative seeks to promote the proper understanding and recognition of the rule of law by studying its various elements through research, stakeholders' collaboration and capacity building, thereby contributing to the sustainable development of inclusive and fair societies at both the domestic and international levels.

Closing

Given this will be the last time for Chief Justice Ma to host the Opening of the Legal Year before his Lordship's retirement in January next year, I would like to, on behalf of the Department, convey our sincere appreciation for his Lordship's contribution to the rule of law, and his efforts in retaining and attracting talent of the highest professional quality for our Judiciary to administer justice.

Last but not the least, a happy and peaceful new year to you and your families. Thank you very much.
-----------------------------
【匿名港警爆大鑊】
韓國KBS時事節目《時事直擊：香港 被自殺》
一按即睇
-----------------------------
無懼警暴 學懂自救
《抗暴之戰●法例須知》讀果 上架
-----------------------------
【撐學生】
召集有心人 撐學生全年睇《蘋果》
立即按此