5 g: o3 o5 a1 ~TVBNOW 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。2014年9月，終審法院審理針對立法會主席的「剪布」決定提出的司法覆核申請，明確指出三權分立是植根於普通法而得到《基本法》確認的憲法原則 (Leung Kwok Hung v President of the Legislative Council (No 1) (FACV 1/2014)，第26-28段)。 ; ]) v H! G3 j1 m$ M4 B: x公仔箱論壇 E& J3 [% ^" F1 W* U! g8 {公仔箱論壇《基本法》不能確保三權分立免在香港特別行政區的法律制度中「被消失」tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb4 C: y: q4 Q, _. P/ p
4 W6 `2 s) I& u; s
在張曉明發表三權分立在回歸前或回歸後都不存在的言論後，必定有人以《基本法》反駁，但我認為《基本法》不可能確保三權分立免在香港特別行政區的法律制度和政治體制中「被消失」。雖然終審法院在上述Leung Kwok Hung一案中認為《基本法》第二條確認了三權分立的原則，但眾所周知，由鄧小平在起草《基本法》初期的申述開始，中央一向否定香港特別行政區的政治體制包含三權分立的元素，正如張曉明所說，「不搞『三權分立』是基本法起草有關規定時的一個重要指導思想。」，這一點是毋庸置疑的。既然如此，中央將《基本法》下的香港特別行政區政治體制解讀成一個「在中央政府直轄之下、實行以行政長官為核心的行政主導、行政與立法既相互制衡又互相配合、司法獨立的政治體制」，變得合情合理。近年來，中央官員和與北京政府關係密切的學者在愈來愈多公開場合解讀《基本法》，並指出大眾如何誤解《基本法》的條文，無非想建立一套官方的、合乎法治精神的解釋標準。 / n3 V5 o+ [5 z" @5 t- Z) bTVBNOW 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。 5 h3 B8 ~/ e4 t; h4 R- FTVBNOW 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。三權分立涉及行政長官的地位，當然與中央和香港特別行政區關係有關，所以全國人民代表大會常務委員會可以在適當的時機，根據《基本法》第158條解釋為何三權分立在香港特別行政區從來都不存在，或退一步，解釋三權分立的原則如何在《基本法》的框架下演化至中央認為可行的模式。要強調一點，全國人民代表大會常務委員會的確要聽取基本法委員會的專家意見，但沒有責任以普通法為起點解釋三權分立 (如果它存在)，更不需要考慮上述法官提出的論據，沒有憲法法院之類的機制，全國人民代表大會常務委員會對《基本法》有絕對的解讀權。 & j- _+ O9 d0 z0 r; E公仔箱論壇 3 |0 t( w4 w# t6 w/ o總結9 O3 \$ y- e5 }# I: A8 ^
公仔箱論壇. j+ U) G; j2 x/ A+ c
《基本法》第8條令香港原有的普通法得以在回歸後保留，而三權分立作為一個普通法原則，在不同《基本法》相抵觸或經立法會作出修改的前題下，必定存在於香港特別行政區的法律制度和政治體制。但在中央眼中，普通法中的三權分立原則肯定是張曉明所說「原有政治體制中的糟粕元素」，必須摒棄，以達至有效率的管治；又如Peter Wesley-Smith教授所言，權力分立在中國憲法中沒有地位，北京政府只將之視為「資產階級的空想」(bourgeois conceit)。如上所言，中央否定三權分立的原則，在《基本法》和「起草時形成的主流意見和基本共識」之下，頓然變得合情、合理、合法。因此，我不認同高舉《基本法》或法治的旗幟就可以反駁三權分立原則在特區政制中不存在的論述。這不是一場辯論比賽，而是威權在生產真理。 ' g! |% F. L' V- p1 U公仔箱論壇& X, P+ |0 y3 k. \6 E* H8 G# \8 h
注： # a0 w' t( ~" _( Z/ STVBNOW 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。 Peter Wesley-Smith, ‘Judges and Judicial Power under the Hong Kong Basic Law’ in Guenther Doeker-Mach and Klaus A. Ziegert (dds.) (2004) Law, Legal Culture and Politics in the Twenty First Century (Franx Steiner Verlag: Stuttgart), 465.作者: felicity2010 時間: 2015-9-14 07:50 PM
法政匯思: 請張曉明熟讀基本法* q" Q1 W' O8 J2 `% S5 K9 y3 C
: p6 ]3 B2 D, j' `6 ~/ ? - x. I9 G0 R- N; R0 [
7 z! t" F: C. s* {【法政匯思短評：關於張曉明的「特首超越三權」論】 + {% l' F' P) b6 X" e- d 0 \% Z& Q. v1 TTVBNOW 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。THE PROGRESSIVE LAWYERS GROUP'S SHORT COMMENTARY REGARDING ZHANG XIAOMING'S CLAIM THAT "THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE TRANSCENDS THE THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT" + E3 L* J9 u1 G- H5.39.217.765.39.217.76 o0 I; u! l! O. j( A
中聯辦主任張曉明在九月十二日表示，行政長官具超然於行政、立法和司法機關的地位，又指三權分立只適用於主權完整國家的層面上。法政匯思認為此等論點欠缺法律基礎。 3 L6 ^! U, u4 Z7 ?公仔箱論壇 ) D, G( I7 Q. S* E4 bTVBNOW 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。（1）特首地位來自基本法，不存在「特殊法律地位」5.39.217.76) r/ u/ e$ x: C) t3 n, n4 }. v
! v5 a& {# {. g8 p- P. a$ T& U1 Ttvb now,tvbnow,bttvb三權分立，即行政、司法和立法三個機關獨立運作而又互相制衡，目前在不少民主地區的全國政府、州政府甚至地方政府均正實行。張曉明指其只適用於主權國家層面就充分表現他的無知。TVBNOW 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。" R. o& o. |# p" M. Z- V' H; o
至於在香港，從基本法整體的條文來看，三權分立的安排至為明顯，這一點亦已得到終審法院確認（參見梁國雄 對 香港特別行政區立法會主席 (2014)，第27段）。基本法清楚分辨香港的行政、司法和立法機關，並於多處列出其三者互相制衡的條文。例如： : [8 B* y* E3 |8 K* a) l8 ` 5 ^% J, x' Y! p- N QTVBNOW 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。- 基本法第六十四條列明特區政府須遵守法律，並對立法會負責。 ' V) f3 V0 `, ]7 o# w& \公仔箱論壇- 基本法第四十九條、五十條、五十一條及七十六列出行政長官對立法會的限制，如在特殊情況下可解散立法會等。公仔箱論壇! M: N S9 F, A: g) P$ i' s
- 司法機關方面，基本法第八十條訂明香港各級法院是香港的司法機關，行使香港特別行政區的審判權，司法獨立則受第八十五條保障：「香港特別行政區法院獨立進行審判，不受任何干涉」。 . b7 q! s6 @" F7 R$ {- B6 P3 S" s4 V3 E' t
（3）請張曉明熟讀基本法 5 e9 ?' \+ f @2 s. L! S& r9 p0 C公仔箱論壇 ( Y; d. {4 c l5 J, G張曉明是一位西南政法學院及中國人民大學等在內地被視為著名院校的法律系畢業生。惟他在星期六的那番言論卻展示出他對法律的曲解及無知，實在有愧於其母校的聲譽。與其再為香港添煩添亂，張曉明這位幹部應該先熟讀基本法再說。簡單來說，張的論述簡直是荒謬絕倫，而那些嘗試為他護航的人士應小心「跟車太貼」，最終同樣被視為一群小丑。% F+ O( q+ q8 b
法政匯思 * y- G9 q: z' w2 M* ^8 `4 w2015年9月14日 3 |. E/ G$ H9 B5 O% U2 L; N6 }TVBNOW 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。* G t+ G4 [% T) k9 A" [
The Director of the Central Government's Liaison Office, Zhang Xiaoming, said on 12 September that the. Chief Executive's ("CE") position transcends that of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, and that separation of powers between these three branches of government can only be applied at the level of a sovereign. The Progressive Lawyers Group considers such views to be devoid of legal basis. $ M) A6 w# v9 {2 j6 _, M4 H5.39.217.76 * ]! Z1 ~ @% x' f7 ^* M) m公仔箱論壇(1) The CE's position stems from the Basic Law, with no "special legal status"公仔箱論壇9 a6 h: |( Q8 H: O5 D' y N
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb9 ]' D6 a* B4 [- o# y& U
The Basic Law has constitutional status in Hong Kong SAR, and is the source which sets out the CE's powers. The SAR's affairs, including the CE's roles and limits on his powers, are provided for under the Basic Law, and cannot be altered simply by some apparatchik claiming that the CE is the means by which the Central Government rules Hong Kong:tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb3 g r4 k' x' r/ V: ~
: |) }8 o$ N( Y0 l
- Article 2 of the Basic Law clearly states that Hong Kong enjoys executive, legislative, and independent judicial (including the power of final adjudication) powers.公仔箱論壇2 O! ^, u% k N/ ^
- Article 11 of the Basic Law requires that Hong Kong's systems in respect of executive, legislature and judiciary shall be based on the Basic Law itself. % M# T* P" T g+ S" y- Article 59 of the Basic Law stipulates that the SAR Government is the executive branch of government in Hong Kong, and that the CE is the head of the SAR Government. Thus, the CE is clearly and merely part of the executive branch, and does not in any way enjoy a status which transcends the executive branch. " g. B2 W7 W) m) `* LTVBNOW 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。- Article 64 of the Basic Law also states that the SAR Government must abide by the law. Thus, as the head of the SAR Government, the CR must abide by and cannot transcend the law, including the Basic Law. 4 }; E/ }. X7 u, S6 \* }公仔箱論壇! Y. r9 N, O9 F4 s- d# ?
As can be seen, under the Basic Law, there does not exist any so-called special legal position when it comes to the CE's role in Hong Kong's political system. Thus, Zhang Xiaoming's statements are devoid of legal basis. ; U% J. Y2 G( J& Y, [- N2 s 8 y! O- T. W0 W. Z$ Q1 Ctvb now,tvbnow,bttvb(2) Separation of powers between the three branches of government is not only applicable at the sovereign level, the CE is subject to legislative and judicial checksTVBNOW 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。! j+ c1 K7 m( N% f _, V7 `# O
1 A0 |7 K& `% ~4 {The separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches, where they operate independently but also subject to checks on each other's powers, is something that is currently applicable to the national, state and even local governments of many democratic jurisdictions. Zhang Xiaoming's assertion that this concept is applicable only at the level of the sovereign clearly shows his ignorance in this regard. " V, I% j$ A: J; y$ t/ H1 `/ f5.39.217.76 4 G8 C! m' m6 `7 Wtvb now,tvbnow,bttvbAs to Hong Kong, looking at the provisions of the Basic Law as a whole, the existence of such separation of powers is relatively clear, and was affirmed by the Court of Final Appeal (see Leung Kwok Hung v The President of the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (2014), paragraph 27). The Basic Law clearly delineates Hong Kong's executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, and in a various parts set out provisions which create checks on each other's powers. For example: , I% G9 v+ d- ?$ E3 l/ T5.39.217.76 ( _! ^$ T6 ^% u5.39.217.76- Article 64 of the Basic Law states that the SAR Government must abide by the law and be accountable to the Legislative Council. : Y8 c9 K9 w" }! Ytvb now,tvbnow,bttvb- Articles 49, 50, 51 and 76 states that the CE's checks on the Legislative Council, such as the special circumstances when he can dissolve the Legislative Council.5.39.217.76, p+ {" { b1 e$ {; h* W) {+ d
- As regards the judiciary, Article 80 of the Basic Law states that the various courts of Hong Kong constitute Hong Kong's judiciary, which exercises the Hong Kong SAR's judicial power, and the independence of the judiciary is protected by Article 85: "The courts of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall exercise judicial power independently, free from any interference."9 S; G# ]6 t6 O" h& h# f. E
4 R* e1 i# A) R8 u
(3) Zhang Xiaoming should seek to familiarise himself with the Basic Law 6 e( l9 [+ X9 j( f" I0 v公仔箱論壇 9 {7 C6 u" ~- V% Y+ AZhang Xiaoming graduated with law degrees from Southwest University of Political Science and Law and Renmin University of China, both of which are apparently colleges of renown within Mainland China. However, his remarks on Saturday demonstrated his twisting and ignorance of the law, which is a disservice to his alma mater's reputation. Rather than yet again sowing trouble and discord in Hong Kong, Zhang Xiaoming the apparatchik should seek first to familiarise himself with the Basic Law before saying anything further on these topics. In short, Zhang's comments are so patently absurd that those seeking to defend him should be careful of being seen as sailing too close to the wind, lest they end up also appearing as buffoons themselves.tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb E) O& E" N. t9 z7 N
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb/ X! F# g+ J- r% O" L5 u6 B5 l: ^
Progressive Lawyers Grouptvb now,tvbnow,bttvb/ d! m# L4 a: R. N
14 September 2015作者: mcr125 時間: 2015-9-14 08:54 PM
5.39.217.764 y* u; C) e( O) u+ A; m
- x. I9 G0 R- N; R0 [