薄熙來治渝啟示 ： 強政權人治難長遠 重民權法治可久安

<轉載自2012年3月16日 明報社評>

 

重慶「打黑英雄」王立軍出事後，提拔他的薄熙來受到什麼影響，備受關注，現在薄熙來被免職，日後薄在黨紀國法會否還要承擔責任，尚待事態發展。綜觀薄熙來治渝4年，推行「唱紅、打黑、共富」等政策，不但在全國、在國際也矚目，引發熱切討論。薄熙來在重慶轟轟烈烈幹了4年，是否觸及中共路線之爭，尚待觀察；不過，由他和王立軍所處身個人仕途橫逆景况，若有所謂「重慶模式」，實踐結果顯示這樣的模式有重大缺陷，主要在於推行人治而非法治，強化政權而非民權，以一黨之尊凌駕公民社會，最終以失敗收場。

 

唱紅勾起文革噩夢 打黑突顯政府專橫

薄熙來在重慶唱紅、打黑、共富，其實並非什麼新發明，只是他所以類如曾經使人民蒙受苦痛、國家陷於災難的「搞運動」方式推行，而人民對文革悲劇刻骨銘心，文革是否回潮？薄熙來勾起了一些人的「運動囉」噩夢。

在內地，大小城市的廣場或民衆聚腳之處，每屆黃昏，都有人聚集，唱歌跳舞，民衆大多上了年紀，文革紅歌唱得朗朗上口，他們以唱紅歌為樂，並無什麼動機，人們也不認為文革回潮了。重慶「唱紅」則是政府行為，以財政補貼唱紅歌組織，甚或強制各個單位組織紅歌隊，而官方傳媒大力配合，撥出時段空間，使紅歌深入民間。重慶經由組織出來的唱紅歌場面，經歷過文革的人會十分熟悉。

薄熙來組織唱紅，不相信他有推動文革回潮之意，因為薄應該深知極左不得人心，人民唾棄左毒。他可能只是看準民衆不滿現狀，藉着唱紅歌凝聚民氣，作為他打黑的政治本錢。不過，內地歷經30多年改革開放，思想真空，價值混沌，加上貪官污吏惡名昭彰，劣迹斑斑，社會不公平、不公義之事，無日無之，這是搞群衆運動的極佳土壤。薄熙來當然不是毛澤東，中共也摒棄了以階級鬥爭為綱的路線，但是類似土壤，當被利用作達至政治目的時，會否變質和異化？這是重慶唱紅值得忐忑之處。

至於打黑，政府對付黑社會，彰顯公義，保護人民免受脅迫，乃應有之義，舉世皆然。重慶打黑力度強橫，「殲滅」黑幫組織數量之多、打擊涉黑官員官位之高，大長正義之氣，大滅黑幫威風，使得重慶治安大為改善，市民稱善。不過，薄熙來和王立軍在重慶打黑，基本上以搞運動的架勢進行，盡顯行政機關霸道一面。另外，有迹象顯示，重慶打了大批黑社會組織，卻冒出了另一批黑幫，而打黑所得數以千億元計金錢的去向，也備受質疑，新黑幫與當權者的關係和所涉及利益，也與當權者千絲萬縷，所以，重慶打黑最終得益的是什麼人，王立軍事件和薄熙來受牽連，或許折射出一些「內幕」。

另外，內地有學者分析，重慶打黑不在法律規範下進行，有「黑打」之嫌，即是把打黑轉化成管理控制政治、經濟、社會文化事務的一種方法。還有是重慶打黑，基本上先定目標，再講證據，隨意性很大，過程不透明，權力是否運用得當，是一大疑問。再就是，為涉嫌黑幫分子辯護的北京律師李莊，因而失去律師資格、被控偽造證據和妨害作證罪成，坐牢1年半，一案未了，李莊還被控侵吞一名當事人50萬元人民幣等，顯示重慶當局對李莊的迫害，是要對法律界發出警告。薄熙來談及此事時，講得聲色俱厲，理直氣壯。重慶打黑真象，可見一斑。

至於共富，政府推行福利政策，低下階層得到實益，不會有人抗拒，不過，所需資金何來？重慶打黑幾年，從黑幫得到大量資金，這些資金，部分被用作推行共富政策，目前，舉世認為做得較好福利的北歐國家，財政來源靠稅收，進行財富再分配；重慶共富，本質上與羅賓漢式劫富濟貧，並無不同，但是這種方式不可能持久，政策也不可能持續。

薄熙來主政重慶4年，其治渝模式可以歸結借助民眾對貧富差距等社會問題的不滿，以「唱紅、打黑、共富」操作的「重慶模式」，受到左派擁戴，但其強化國家機器、發動社會運動、脫離法治軌道等方式，也引發較大爭議，甚至被批評為文革回潮、開歷史倒車。所謂重慶模式，是否涉及中共路線之爭，以目前所知，無法判別，不過，無論薄熙來4年來給重慶帶來多少轉變，但是他的做法所帶來潛在危險，必須警惕。

關鍵不在重慶改變多少 問題在會否開歷史倒車

因為薄熙來所推動政策，有重大缺陷：他在推行人治而非法治，他在強化政權而非民權，他以一黨之尊凌駕公民社會。歷史上，不乏野心家曾經以類似模式取得權力，最終使社會、國家陷於萬劫不復境地。文化大革命的毛澤東如是，希特勒如是。我們不是以薄熙來比擬毛澤東和希特勒，只是要指出，「重慶模式」有這樣的潛在危險。

總理溫家寶前日在記者會上講到「不政改，經濟成果還有可能得不償失，文革悲劇還有可能重臨」，溫總力陳政治體制改革之緊迫性，結合重慶模式和王立軍、薄熙來出事，溫總所流露焦慮感，有了最佳註腳。溫總這次講政治體制改革，其中特別提到「特別是黨和國家領導制度的改革」，從薄熙來的重慶事變，看來知道溫總在說些什麼了。
Lesson to be Learned from Bo's Chongqing Model of Government

 

THE fall of Wang Lijun, Chongqing's "crime-busting hero", is followed by his political patron Bo Xilai's dismissal from office. In his four years as ruler of Chongqing, Bo's government policies consisted mainly in singing red songs, fighting organised crime, and the fair distribution of wealth, which attracted national as well as international attention, and gave rise to animated discussions. Though there was nothing new in those policies, they were carried out in the form of "mass movements", which had once brought much misery to the people, and disaster to the nation.

 

In Chongqing, red singsongs were organised by the authorities, and government subsidies were given to red singing groups. The singing scenes thus organised and staged were strongly reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution. After more than 30 years' reform and opening up, China today is ideologically a vacuum, and there are no clearly established social values. In addition, the authorities are notorious for their rampant corruption, as a result of which there are injustices and grievances everywhere. All this constitutes an excellent climate for mass movements. But when this climate is exploited for political purposes, will things get out of hand? The red singing movement in Chongqing was therefore viewed with some misgivings.

As for fighting organised crime, it is something every government should do to uphold justice and protect the public. However, in Chongqing Bo and Wang's war against organised crime took the form of a mass movement, and gave full expression to political ruthlessness. Moreover, it is not clear where the seized underworld money amounting to hundreds of billions of yuan had gone. Who eventually profited from the movement? The Wang incident and Bo's getting implicated might shed some light on the question.

It should also be noted that Li Zhuang, a Beijing-based lawyer, lost his lawyer's license and was put on trial for falsifying evidence and jeopardising testimony after he served as the defence lawyer of a suspected Chongqing gangster. He was jailed for a term of 18 months, and before the term was over, he was put on trial again for embezzling a client's money, which was said to amount to 500,000 yuan. Obviously, the Chongqing authorities' persecution of Li was meant to serve as a warning to the legal profession. One can see from this the real nature of Chongqing's war against organised crime.

Finally, with regard to the fair distribution of wealth, those in the lower social strata of course would have nothing to complain about as long as they really benefited. But where did the necessary funds come from? In the past few years, a lot of money was seized from the criminal underworld, and part of it might have been used for this purpose. But such a way of "redistributing wealth" cannot possibly last. So much for the "fair distribution of wealth" policy.

Premier Wen Jiabao said at a press conference the day before yesterday that "without political reform, what China has achieved economically may yet be lost, and tragedies like the Cultural Revolution may happen again". He stressed the pressing need for political structural reform, and the anxiety he expressed can be readily understood when Bo's Chongqing model of government is seen in its true perspective. In his call for political reform, Wen made particular mention of "reforming the leadership structure of the party and the country". This remark can be better understood by referring to Bo's Chongqing experience.

明報社評2012.03.16﹕薄熙來治渝啟示﹕強政權人治難長遠 重民權法治可久安

重慶「打黑英雄」王立軍出事後，提拔他的薄熙來被免職。綜觀薄熙來治渝4年，推行「唱紅、打黑、共富」等政策，不但在全國、在國際也矚目，引發熱切討論。薄熙來在重慶唱紅、打黑、共富，其實並非什麼新發明，只是他所以類如曾經使人民蒙受苦痛、國家陷於災難的「搞運動」方式推行。

重慶「唱紅」是政府行為，以財政補貼唱紅歌組織。重慶經由組織出來的唱紅歌場面，經歷過文革的人會十分熟悉。內地歷經30多年改革開放，思想真空，價值混沌，加上貪官污吏惡名昭彰，劣迹斑斑，社會不公平、不公義之事，無日無之，這是搞群衆運動的極佳土壤。類似土壤，當被利用作達至政治目的時，會否變質和異化？這是重慶唱紅值得忐忑之處。

至於打黑，政府對付黑社會，彰顯公義，保護人民免受脅迫，乃應有之義，舉世皆然。不過，薄熙來和王立軍在重慶打黑，基本上以搞運動的架勢進行，盡顯行政機關霸道一面。另外，打黑所得數以千億元計金錢的去向，也備受質疑，所以，重慶打黑最終得益的是什麼人，王立軍事件和薄熙來受牽連，或許折射出一些「內幕」。

另外，為涉嫌黑幫分子辯護的北京律師李莊，因而失去律師資格、被控偽造證據和妨害作證罪成，坐牢1年半，一案未了，李莊還被控侵吞一名當事人50萬元人民幣等，顯示重慶當局對李莊的迫害，是要對法律界發出警告。重慶打黑真象，可見一斑。

至於共富，政府推行福利政策，低下階層得到實益，不會有人抗拒，不過，所需資金何來？重慶打黑幾年，從黑幫得到大量資金，這些資金，部分被用作推行共富政策，但是這種方式不可能持久，政策也不可能持續。

總理溫家寶前日在記者會上講到「不政改，經濟成果還有可能得不償失，文革悲劇還有可能重臨」，溫總力陳政治體制改革之緊迫性，結合重慶模式，溫總所流露焦慮感，有了最佳註腳。溫總這次講政治體制改革，其中特別提到「特別是黨和國家領導制度的改革」，從薄熙來的重慶事變，看來知道溫總在說些什麼了。