警隊尊嚴非靠辱警罪維護

<轉載自2017年2月21日 明報 社評>

7名警員佔領運動期間襲擊曾健超，判囚兩年，兩個警員協會明日召開聯合特別代表大會，邀請前線警員發表意見，預料將提及辱警罪立法是否可行。近年香港街頭鬥爭頻仍，警隊成為磨心，有前線警員對粗言辱罵挑釁心存怨氣，可以理解，可是現在提出設立辱警罪，只會加劇社會上的對立情緒，無助改善警隊形象和權威尊嚴，甚至可能適得其反。七警案裁決再次觸動了社會撕裂的傷疤，惹來不少情緒化和政治化的反應，實非香港之福，各方人士應當冷靜克制，讓七警案裁決所引起的紛爭降溫，勿再把裁決政治化，趁機挑撥矛盾。

辱警罪立法問題多 警隊應避政治紛爭

香港警務督察協會與香港警察隊員佐級協會將在明日的特別代表大會上，交代七警獄中情况及支援籌款工作，並讓與會前線同事暢所欲言。據了解，七警定罪判刑後，警隊內部出現躁動，不少警務人員不滿要長期忍受政治化的批評和攻擊，「將忍受侮辱當作保持專業的一部分」，有人要求發起燭光晚會或大遊行，甚至有激進者要求全面杯葛司法機構，為此兩個警員協會認為，應當讓前線同事表達怨氣，要求管理層採取措施重建警隊士氣，設立辱警罪正是主張之一。 警務督察協會主席李占安便提到辱警罪討論多時，並非始於七警案，很多國家亦有類似法例，保障警員執法時得到尊重和不會受辱，雖然是否推行仍要收集意見，但是協會歡迎警員提出討論。

香港是言論自由的社會，任何理性的討論都不應排除，不過在當前社會撕裂氣氛下，設立辱警罪也許有助警隊內部「疏導怨氣」，卻未必有助提升警隊尊嚴，還有可能令警隊陷入一場激烈政治紛爭漩渦之中，給對立矛盾火上加油，令警隊面臨更多政治攻擊。辱警罪立法存在不少困難，其中之一就是如何定義「辱警」，例如質疑執法、向警員做出不文手勢，是否已足以構成辱警罪。以法國為例，雖然當地設有侮辱公務員罪，辱警可以判處罰款監禁，惟爭議甚大。當地傳媒批評，近年法國警方援引相關法例提控的案件顯著增加，有濫用法例之嫌，一些民間團體亦一直要求廢除相關法例。

在美國，以不文手勢或粗言穢語指罵警察，原則上並不觸犯法例，除非牽涉到所謂「挑釁言論」（fighting words），帶有挑釁警員打鬥的意味，才會因為違反《擾亂和平條例》而被捕。其實，香港現有的《公安條例》亦有類似條文，訂明任何人在公眾地方作出擾亂秩序行為，「或使用恐嚇性、辱罵性或侮辱性的言詞」，「相當可能會導致社會安寧破壞」，即屬犯罪。無論從保障人權還是法律觀點看，制訂辱警法是否有必要，令人懷疑。

侮辱法官突顯撕裂 社會盼冷靜非挑撥

誠然，警察要有效執法維持治安，需要獲得合理的尊重，市民對警員如有不滿，也應循正常渠道投訴，不應惡意挑釁，不過警隊執法時也必須緊守法律，不偏不倚，避免捲入政治漩渦。2013年女教師林慧思粗言辱罵警員事件，有退役和休班警員事後在旺角出席撐警集會，引發有否違反《警察通例》禁止警員參與政治活動的爭議。當前警隊與社會的關係尚待擺正，如此敏感時刻，警隊上下行事宜小心慎重，以免惹來更多閒言閒語。

過去數天，社會各界就七警定罪判刑議論紛紛，雖然律政司強調不能惡意攻擊法官，呼籲尊重司法獨立，可是針對法官的情緒化激烈言辭未息。日前舉行的撐警遊行集會上，便出現帶有侮辱法官字眼的標語。近年香港社會撕裂加劇，侮辱法官、蔑視司法的風氣有變本加厲之勢，甚至出現恐嚇法官的事件，例如前年屯門裁判法院暫委裁判官陳碧橋便透露，因為裁定反水貨客女示威者襲警罪成，遭受威嚇；去年底，九龍城裁判法院女裁判官香淑嫻在審理旺角暴亂案後，收到內附5吋長鎅刀的郵件，雖然未能確定寄件者的動機，惟明顯是對法官的恐嚇。侮辱法官歪風折射的是社會上小撮人事事政治掛帥，只講敵我矛盾，不再以持平理性看待法院裁決，而這又跟當前香港社會政治化的氛圍息息相關。侮辱法官歪風必須遏止，當前香港社會需要的，是更多的冷靜和理智克制，而不是更多的挑撥和政治炒作。

Police force's dignity

THE SEVEN POLICE OFFICERS who beat Ken Tsang up during the "occupation" have been sentenced to two years in prison. Two police associations are to hold tomorrow a joint representative meeting, at which front-line officers will be invited to air their views. It is expected to be discussed at that meeting whether it is feasible to make it a statutory offence to insult a police officer.

In Hong Kong, where people enjoy free speech, no sensible discussion should be ruled out. It may help vent police officers' resentment to make it an offence to insult a police officer. However, society being divided and the social atmosphere being as it is now, this move may, instead of helping improve the police force's dignity, actually plunge it into a whirlpool of fierce political dispute, add fuel to the flame of antagonism and lay it more open to political attacks. There are not a few difficulties with legislating against insulting police officers. One of them is how the offence should be defined. For example, does it amount to an insult to a police officer to doubt the way he enforces the law or make to him a rude gesture?

In fact, the Public Order Ordinance expressly provides, "Any person who in any public place behaves in a noisy or disorderly manner or uses... threatening, abusive or insulting words... whereby a breach of the peace is likely to be caused shall be guilty of an offence...." It is doubtful that Hong Kong needs to legislate against insulting police officers whether from the perspective of protecting human rights or from that of law.

True, police officers must get reasonably respected before they can effectively enforce the law and maintain law and order. A citizen unhappy with a police officer should file a complaint against him through the proper channels instead of resorting to malicious provocation. However, when they enforce the law, police officers must strictly abide by the law and be impartial lest they should fall into a political whirlpool.

Over the past few days, all sorts of comments have been made about the seven police officers' conviction and the sentences they received. The Secretary for Justice has stressed it is not right to bash judges maliciously and called on citizens to respect the judiciary's independence, but strong, emotional rhetoric about judges has not ceased. The other day, slogans containing words insulting to judges were seen at some police supporters' rally. Society has become more and more sharply divided in the territory over the past few years, and the tendency towards insulting judges and showing contempt for the judiciary seems to have worsened. Judges have even been threatened. For example, Deputy Magistrate Michael Chan of Tuen Mun Court revealed the year before last he had been threatened because he had found a woman who had protested against parallel trading guilty of assaulting a police officer. The evil tendency towards insulting judges is evidence that a handful of people put politics first, concern themselves solely with "contradictions between ourselves and the enemy" and can no longer look at court rulings fairly or sensibly. That has everything to do with the social atmosphere of politicisation that exists in Hong Kong now. The evil tendency towards insulting judges ought to be curbed. What society needs in Hong Kong is greater calm, sensibleness and restraint rather than more provocation or more political sensationalisation.

警隊尊嚴非靠辱警罪維護

7名警員佔領運動期間襲擊曾健超，判囚兩年，兩個警員協會明日召開聯合特別代表大會，邀請前線警員發表意見，預料將提及辱警罪立法是否可行。

香港是言論自由的社會，任何理性的討論都不應排除，不過在當前社會撕裂氣氛下，設立辱警罪也許有助警隊內部「疏導怨氣」，卻未必有助提升警隊尊嚴，還有可能令警隊陷入一場激烈政治紛爭漩渦之中，給對立矛盾火上加油，令警隊面臨更多政治攻擊。辱警罪立法存在不少困難，其中之一就是如何定義「辱警」，例如質疑執法、向警員做出不文手勢，是否已足以構成辱警罪。

其實，香港現有的《公安條例》訂明任何人在公眾地方作出擾亂秩序行為，「或使用恐嚇性、辱罵性或侮辱性的言詞」，「相當可能會導致社會安寧破壞」，即屬犯罪。無論從保障人權還是法律觀點看，制訂辱警法是否有必要，令人懷疑。

誠然，警察要有效執法維持治安，需要獲得合理的尊重，市民對警員如有不滿，也應循正常渠道投訴，不應惡意挑釁，不過警隊執法時也必須緊守法律，不偏不倚，避免捲入政治漩渦。

過去數天，社會各界就七警定罪判刑議論紛紛，雖然律政司強調不能惡意攻擊法官，呼籲尊重司法獨立，可是針對法官的情緒化激烈言辭未息。日前舉行的撐警遊行集會上，便出現帶有侮辱法官字眼的標語。近年香港社會撕裂加劇，侮辱法官、蔑視司法的風氣有變本加厲之勢，甚至出現恐嚇法官的事件，例如前年屯門裁判法院暫委裁判官陳碧橋便透露，因為裁定反水貨客女示威者襲警罪成，遭受威嚇。侮辱法官歪風折射的是社會上小撮人事事政治掛帥，只講敵我矛盾，不再以持平理性看待法院裁決，而這又跟當前香港社會政治化的氛圍息息相關。侮辱法官歪風必須遏止，當前香港社會需要的，是更多的冷靜和理智克制，而不是更多的挑撥和政治炒作。