【新唐人2014年11月15日訊】香港學聯宣佈，他們將派出3名代表飛往北京，希望有機會向中共領導人和人大常委會反映香港人爭取「真普選」的訴求。同時，小巴團體申請的延長旺角佔領區禁制令也生效，並加進了對違反警務處理的細節。那麼，香港爭取「真普選」的運動，接下來會怎樣發展呢？請看報導。
香港學聯秘書長周永康13號向外界透露，包括他自己在內的3名學聯代表，將於15號下午5點乘飛機前往北京，要求與國務院總理李克強等中共官員會晤，表達港人對普選的訴求。
周永康表示，如果北京不准他們入境，就代表他們害怕港人聲音。那麼港人未來的抗爭只會更加熾烈。
香港學聯也發表聲明說，這次學聯派代表上京有兩個目的，第一、是把香港的真正民意帶給中共當局，防止中共因消息不準確而作出錯誤決定。第二、就是強烈抗議把中國制度強加於香港。
學聯還強調說，此次學聯去北京是逼不得已，並非挑戰中央權威，更不是破壞「一國兩制」。
此外，香港學聯還會在3個佔領區放置的「我要真普選」橫幅上，讓市民寫上對香港政改的意見，然後他們將把有關橫幅帶到北京。
香港中文大學政治學副教授馬岳：「他們覺得特區政府不能代表他們的意見，所以應該要直接到北京去反映香港人對民主的意見。但是我相信，他們能真正見到中央官員的機會非常低。」
香港中文大學政治學副教授馬岳表示，如果中共官員不見學生代表，那也是他們對香港民眾的態度。而學生想要取得「真普選」的機會，就需要北京改變以前的決定。他們此前請求前香港特首董建華等出面聯繫北京，沒有得到回應。所以馬岳認為，學生們闖北京是無奈之舉。
香港《開放雜誌》總編輯金鐘對《法國國際廣播電臺》表示，中國憲法第62條11款指明說，人大常委不適當的決定是可以「改變或者撤銷」的。所以要中共人大撤銷或修改關於香港普選特首的831決定，這是佔中抗命的大方向。
不過，香港《明報》從調停學生佔中與港府的中間人那裏了解到，北京給予中間人和港府的資訊是「中央不會退讓，為免麻煩，學聯連北京也不能進入，會搭機返港」。
中共官媒《環球時報》此前也說，學聯代表「沒有權利要求直接會見中央政府或人大領導人。如果技術上做得到，不讓他們入境應是第一選擇。」
與此同時，在香港圍繞佔中的衝突也在加劇。
14號，法庭在的士及小巴團體申請的延長臨時禁上又蓋了印，這讓在旺角佔領區、金鐘中信大廈外的禁制令生了效。法官還在禁制令中增加了對違反警務處理的細節。
不過法律界卻質疑禁制令的做法。
香港《蘋果日報》報導，法律界元老級人物、終審法院前常任法官列顯倫，對原告潮聯小巴公司根本沒有向法庭提交任何清除路障計劃，法庭仍頒布禁制令的做法感到奇怪，而原告在禁制令發出後，從未執行禁制令更是讓列顯倫詫異。他表示，在首份禁制令未獲執行時，再頒布第二次禁制令是令人難以想像的。
列顯倫此前還說，小巴商會申請的臨時禁制令，屬於香港律政司的責任範圍，用私人訴訟公眾秩序不合適。
《蘋果》的報導說，香港大學法律學院教授陳文敏也批評，政府擬動用龐大警力執行禁制令，變相以公帑執行一宗民事訴訟的判決，程式上完全錯誤。
香港立法會議員、資深大律師梁家傑：「在一個民事案，來要求警方幫助你執行一個民事的法庭判處來的禁制令，這個呢，我當了30年的大律師，從來沒見過的。」
香港立法會議員、資深大律師梁家傑認為，這種禁制令混淆了民事和刑事法庭的內容，也破壞了本應由政府執行公共秩序訴因問題的慣例。
但馬岳指出，即使警方真的在旺角、金鐘清場，學生還是可以到其他地方去繼續佔領。所以香港不政改，佔中也不會在短期內解決。
採訪/秦雪 編輯/宋風
HK Student Representatives Will Travel To Beijing For Appeal
Hong Kong Federation of Students (HKFS) announced that, three
representatives will visit Beijing, to hopefully appeal to
party leaders and the NPC delegates for
general democratic elections.
At the same time, injunctions ordering the cleanup of occupied
areas are extended, as requested by Hong Kong taxi and
light bus groups.
Details were also released on punishing violators
of the order.
What is the next step for Hong Kong’s democratic movements
seeking general democratic elections?
Let’s take a look at the report.
Alex Chow Yong-Kang, the secretary general of HKFS, said on
Nov.13 that he and 2 other HKFS representatives would take the
flight to Beijing at 5 p.m. on 15th.
They will request a meeting with Li Keqiang and other
Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leaders, to directly reflect
Hong Kong people’s demands for general democratic elections.
Chow said, if Beijing denied their entry at immigration, then
the CCP are telling the world that they are afraid of
listening to the Hong Kong people’s voice.
If that happens, resistance from Hong Kong will
only become stronger.
According to a statement by HKFS, the visit to Beijing has
two purposes: first, to convey the real will of HK people to
CCP leaders, such that they will not make wrong decisions
based on false information;
second, remonstrate against forcibly imposing
the CCPs regime on Hong Kong.
HKFS said, the travel to Beijing is a compelling move.
It has no intent to challenge the CCPs authority, or the
“One Country, Two Systems" principle.
In addition, HKFS said they would ask Hong Kong residents to
write down their political opinions on the three
“We Want Real General Democratic Elections" banners placed
at occupied areas.
The banners will then be brought to Beijing
by the representatives.
Ma Ngok, associate professor of political science at CUHK:
They feel that the HK government cannot deliver messages for
them so they should directly visit Beijing to
speak for themselves.
However, I think they will have little chance to meet
CCP central officials in Beijing.
Ma said if CCP officials refuse to meet HK student
representatives, this can also be regarded as an indication of
their attitude toward HK people.
In addition, Beijing may have to take back its decision if
they positively respond to students’ demands.
Previously, students received no response when they asked
former HK chief executive Chee-Hwa Tung to contact Beijing.
Ma thus believes that HKFS has no other choice but to
directly visit Beijing.
Editor-in-chief of Open Magazine Jin Zhong told RFI that,
according to Article 62 Section 11 of the CCP’s Constitution,
improper decisions by the NPC Standing Committee can be
changed or canceled.
Based on this, Occupy Central protesters are directing to
demand cancellation or revision of the NPC’s Aug 31 decision
on HK chief executive election.
On the other hand, Ming Pao learned from mediators between
students and HK government that they were told by Beijing that
the CCP would not compromise.
HKFS representatives will not be allowed to enter Beijing.
They will be directly sent back to Hong Kong via air.
A short time ago, the CCP mouthpiece Global Times reported:
HKFS representatives are not eligible to request a meeting
with CCP central officials or NPC leaders.
The best option is to block them at immigration,
if technically doable.
Meanwhile, the conflicts around occupied areas
in Hong Kong are turning worse.
On No.14, HK High Court extended an injunction over occupied
areas in Mongkok and Admiralty, upon request by HK taxi
and light bus groups.
The judge also added details about punishment against those
resisting police in executing the order.
Hong Kong legal workers are questioning the court decision.
Apple Daily quoted Mr. Henry Litton, senior legal professional
and a non-permanent judge of the Court of Final Appeal,
questioned the court decision.
Litton said it was odd for the court to issue injunctions in a
situation that Chiu Luen Public Light Bus Limited,
the plaintiff, did not give any plan of area cleaning.
Litton said he was further astonished by the fact that
the plaintiff never executed the order after the
injunction was issued.
Litton said it is “unimaginable" to issue a second order when
the first order was not even being executed.
Previously, Litton also commented on the injunction : a civil
court process was being invoked for what I feel is
a public order issue.
An Apple Daily report quoted Johannes Chan, the Dean of
the Faculty of Law for the University of Hong Kong.
Chan criticized that the HK government is planning to use
massive police power in executing an injunction order
resulting from a civil suit, which is completely incorrect
in legal procedure.
Alan Leong, member of HK Legislative Council and
senior lawyer: for a civil suit to request police help in
executing the injunction order, I have never seen things like
this throughout my 30 years of being a lawyer.
Alan Leong said, the injunction order muddles between
decisions of civil court and criminal court, and thus disrupts
the convention that it is the government that brings
public order issues to suit.
Ma Ngok further commented that, even if police clear occupied
areas in Mongkok and Admiralty, student protesters can still
move to other places.
Therefore Occupy Central will not easily see an end if the
HK government denies any kind of political reform.
Interview/QinXue Edit/SongFeng