普選在香港：綠皮書及以後
今天去了香港大學 法律系 比較及公共法律中心的普選研討會("Universal Suffrage in Hong Kong: The Green Paper and Beyond")。科大 成名教授清楚有力地提出各種民主普選對經濟發展以至政治問責的好處的研究證據，學術上比昨天聽潘維教授講的客觀和紮實得多，而他所提出的資料中較有題的更包括香港後物質主義文化的興起與民主訴求的關係，後物質主義要求自由、更大政治參與，和要求政府決策尊重民意，而香港在後物質主義排名原來已高達全球第六。
在另一個有關普選法律觀點的部份，來自西安交通大學的易顯河教授發言內容顯然有點零碎，為拖延民主發展找藉口時欲言又止，只勸我們耐心點，十幾年在歷史上不算長，中國五千年歷史還在等，香港好得多了，嘩，咁都得？法律理據久奉，說的都是主觀「阿爺的話」，此君護法功力差矣。但他也提過，中央若真的要求愛國愛港（當然是中央決定係唔係）才能當選是可理解的；難怪聽說共產黨不怕選舉，只要預知結果。
相反，其他來自海外的學者才能至少引經據典提出些法律理由及觀點，但中文大學 政治與行政學系的戴大為(Michael Davis)教授與易教授至少有一共通觀點吧，就是這些對普選的爭議其實只在乎於要把某些人拒於門外，其他講乜道理也只是借口。
陳方安生發言短片
陸恭蕙發言短片
posted by Charles Mok @ 10:52 PM
1 Comments:
Last night I received a kind message from Prof Yee expressing his feelings after reading my post. First, I have to admit that I used a rather "casual" (as Prof Yee pointed out) tone to comment about his presentation, and while I did not mean it in any slighting kind of way, it was probably still uncalled for and did not serve justice for the seriousness of the topic, and I regret any discomfort it might have caused to Prof Yee and anyone else.
Prof Yee expressed that he felt that I might not understand the debate. When I read that I had the feeling that this is exactly the problem we have been facing. On either side (let's assume there are two sides), each is feeling that the other side is not "getting it." In a sense I am happy that Prof Yee got this feeling, because frankly, that is the same feeling that we on the pro-democracy side have been feeling all through the years.
Most definitely we need to have more communications and break down the barriers and find compromise.
Charles
Post a Comment
<< Home