<轉載自2013年5月9日 明報 社評>
立法會通過成立專責委員會，跟進前任廉政專員湯顯明不當酬酢、送禮收禮等情事，成效如何，主要視乎建制派議員的取態。就傳媒的報道，廉署已經證實了一些情况，事態性質涉及腐敗，不單是湯顯明，廉署個別高層人物和部分工作人員有份參與，廉署的肅貪倡廉形象，已經一落千丈。基於廉署和廉潔對香港的重要性，期望建制派議員撇開個人好惡和利益考慮，善用專責委員會的平台，就事態查個水落石出，重建市民對廉署的信任。建制派議員要撫心自問：當立法會議員所為何事？切勿自欺欺人。
處理湯顯明事件 應讓建制派良心投票
傳媒陸續披露湯顯明專員任內種種行徑，由特首梁振英以至建制派議員回應時，無人敢說正常，只是重申廉潔的重要，但是觸及用什麼方法處理，他們都顯得別有所思，抗拒成立最有效的獨立調查委員會跟進事件，就是最好例子。梁振英所說三管齊下處理，實際上帳委會不能踰越審計署報告，可觸及範圍十分狹窄；廉署調查涉及自己人查自己人，公信力成疑；獨立檢討委員會則是處理制度缺失，不涉及問責。所以，政府未能表現出找出真相的決心。
在政府和建制派嚴陣以待情况下，郭榮鏗和何秀蘭議員另闢蹊徑，首次引用《議事規則》向立法會提交呈請書，要求成立專責委員會跟進湯顯明事件，25名民主派議員起立支持，呈請獲得批准。事態發展，給全面調查湯顯明事件留下了火種，但是委員會能否有效運作，建制派仍然具有關鍵作用。因為這個專責委員會，未按特權及權力條例成立，沒有傳召證人和索取文件的權力，若要傳召什麼人，要向立法會大會提出，需要經過分組點票程序，以過去建制派利用分組點票封殺民主派的提案，目前看不到雙方有相互配合的可能。
建制派就呈請書並無起立支持，應該可以解讀為他們不認同，但是專責委員會按規定得以成立之後，建制派即時表明加入，看來他們要以人數優勢，爭取主導和控制權，以防事態「出軌」。所以，一場議事攻防戰，上演可期。
建制派有政治任務，為政府保駕護航，湯顯明事件除了關乎廉署腐敗，還涉及與中聯辦官員酬酢等行徑是否恰當，建制派的任務就更重要。不過，湯顯明事件太嚴重了，因為香港靠廉署守護廉潔核心價值，現在它卻異化和腐化，這是香港回歸第16年以來其中一樁最重要事件，若不能正確處理，正本清源地使廉署走回正軌，則香港之沉落，將不單經濟、建設滯後，立港之魂也會消散。
建制派在立法會有43席，從過去不少事例說明，它的組成成分並非鐵板一塊，除了與中央關係密切，例如民建聯、工聯會等嫡系人馬，其他成員不乏社會精英，理念和價值取向與主流社會較契合。基於湯顯明事件事關重大，日後專責委員會處理此事時，建制派應該讓成員憑良心投票，使議員自由表達意志，若「組織」上沒有這樣的安排，真心誠意為香港服務的建制派議員，應該自問：為什麼要做議員？難道千辛萬苦爭取議席，目的只為腐敗保駕護航？我們認為，只要他們誠實面對自己，應該不難做正確選擇：申請豁免，按一己意願投票。
湯顯明中聯辦互動正常？應按香港機制釐清
我們要敬告議員們：政府只是一時一地，以人格、良知換來的政治利益，在事關香港廉潔的大是大非問題上，顯得微不足道，期望他們做出對得起香港、對得起市民、也對得起自己的選擇。事實上，若建制派議員相信湯顯明並無不當、廉署中人並無不法情事，則坦蕩蕩的調查，又何足懼哉！若明知湯顯明不當、廉署中人有涉嫌不法情事，卻昧着良知去維護，則這樣的議員，還幹嗎做下去！
傳媒披露與中聯辦官員頻密飲宴、送禮之後，中聯辦主任張曉明說正常，昨日副主任王志民也重彈此調。在憲制上，廉署與中聯辦並無工作關係，若廉署要接待內地官員來港取經，或到內地交流肅貪倡廉經驗，雙方只要建立工作機制，就可按需要推展；這類工作，若事事都要由湯顯明親自處理，不合常理，而且處理這些事都在飲宴桌上進行，乖離了特區政府一貫洽公做法；還有，湯顯明與內地官員交往都涉及送禮，而送禮開支，廉署內部有人操作隱沒之嫌，此外，湯顯明5年任內，收過約450份禮物，其中不乏與內地有關，包括貴價茅台酒等。所謂正常，從何說起？
種種事態透釋着腐敗氣息，已揭露的冰山一角，呈現不正常的迹象，若張曉明和王志民認定情况正常，沒關係，香港市民想聽聽所謂正常，何以為據？在香港，並無長官說了算這一套，必須擺事實、講道理。其實，若認為湯顯明與中聯辦官員互動正常，最好是按香港的機制處理和釐清，這樣除了還湯顯明和中聯辦官員一個清白，日後中聯辦官員也可以依樣畫葫蘆，與特區政府部門官員作同樣互動了。特區政府和中聯辦只有敢於這樣做，才算正常。
Editorial
Does Pro-Establishment Mean Pro-Corruption?
THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL has set up a select committee to look into former ICAC Commissioner Timothy Tong Hin-ming's inappropriate entertainment activities and his practice of giving and receiving gifts. Will the committee's investigation bear fruit? The answer lies largely in the hands of the pro-establishment lawmakers.
With the media gradually bringing to light Tong's irregular practices during his tenure, neither Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying nor pro-establishment lawmakers have the nerve to say that those were regular practices. However, while they reiterate the importance of public integrity, they all seem to think otherwise. This can be seen most clearly in their opposition to the most effective way of investigation: the formation of an independent committee to look into the matter. Leung said they are taking a three-pronged approach. The fact, however, is that the powers of the Legislative Council's Public Accounts Committee are severely limited as it can only look into what is mentioned in the audit report. The ICAC is also said to be investigating the matter, but the credibility of such an internal investigation is questionable. As for the Independent Review Committee, its duty is to improve regulatory mechanisms rather than look into wrongdoings. The government is evidently not intent on finding out the facts.
Under the watchful eye of the government and the pro-establishment camp, lawmakers Dennis Kwok Wing-hang and Cyd Ho Sau-lan, invoking the Rules of Procedure, petitioned the Legislative Council for the establishment of a select committee to probe Tong's case. The petition was granted when 25 pro-democracy lawmakers endorsed it by getting to their feet. However, the effective operation of the committee will not be possible without the cooperation of the pro-establishment camp. For the committee must seek the Legislative Council's approval if it wants to summon any witness to give evidence. Judging by the way the pro-establishment lawmakers have routinely rejected the motions put forward by the pro-democrats, it is unlikely that this time the two sides will be able to work in unison.
No pro-establishment lawmaker stood up in support of Ho and Kwok's petition, which can be taken to mean that they disapproved of it. But when in accordance with regulations the select committee was to be established, pro-establishment lawmakers immediately vowed to join it. They are clearly bent on securing a dominant role in the committee so that nothing "untoward" may happen. A tug of war in the inquiry process can be expected.
Hong Kong looks to the ICAC to safeguard its core value of public integrity. Now, however, the ICAC is deteriorating into corruption. This is one of the most important things that have happened in Hong Kong since its handover 16 years ago. If the case is not properly handled and the ICAC is not brought back to the right track, Hong Kong is doomed. The city not only will lose its lead in economic power and infrastructure development, but will perish spiritually.
Those in the pro-establishment camp should ask themselves: What are lawmakers for? Have they no better job to do than to support corruption? We would like to remind them that political interests acquired at the cost of one's soul are nothing when compared with the crucial issue of anti-corruption in Hong Kong. We hope they will choose a course of action worthy of themselves as well as of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong public. Indeed, if the pro-establishment lawmakers believe that Tong and other ICAC officials have done nothing irregular or illegal, they should have nothing to fear from a thorough investigation. But if they see clearly that Tong and other ICAC officials may have violated the law and so try to cover up for them despite the voice of conscience, why should they continue to serve as lawmakers?
立法會通過成立專責委員會，跟進前任廉政專員湯顯明不當酬酢、送禮收禮等情事，成效如何，主要視乎建制派議員的取態。
傳媒陸續披露湯顯明專員任內種種行徑，由特首梁振英以至建制派議員回應時，無人敢說正常，只是重申廉潔的重要，但是他們都顯得別有所思，都抗拒成立最有效的獨立調查委員會跟進事件，就是最好例子。梁振英所說三管齊下處理，實際上帳委會不能踰越審計署報告，可觸及範圍十分狹窄；廉署調查涉及自己人查自己人，公信力成疑；獨立檢討委員會則是處理制度缺失，不涉及問責。所以，政府未能表現出找出真相的決心。
在政府和建制派嚴陣以待情況下，郭榮鏗和何秀蘭議員引用《議事規則》向立法會提交呈請書，要求成立專責委員會跟進湯顯明事件，25名民主派議員起立支持，呈請獲得批准。但是委員會能否有效運作，建制派仍然具有關鍵作用。因為這個專責委員會若要傳召什麼人，要向立法會大會提出，過去建制派封殺民主派的提案，目前看不到雙方有相互配合的可能。
建制派就呈請書並無起立支持，應該可以解讀為他們不認同，但是專責委員會按規定得以成立之後，建制派即時表明加入，看來他們要爭取主導和控制權，以防事態「出軌」。所以，一場議事攻防戰，上演可期。
香港靠廉署守護廉潔核心價值，現在它卻異化和腐化，這是香港回歸第16年以來其中一樁最重要事件，若不能正確處理，正本清源地使廉署走回正軌，則香港之沉落，將不單經濟、建設滯後，立港之魂也會消散。
建制派應該自問：為什麼要做議員？難道目的只為腐敗保駕護航？我們要敬告議員們：以人格、良知換來的政治利益，在事關香港廉潔的大是大非問題上，顯得微不足道，期望他們做出對得起香港、對得起市民、也對得起自己的選擇。事實上，若建制派議員相信湯顯明並無不當、廉署中人並無不法情事，則坦蕩蕩的調查，又何足懼哉！若明知湯顯明不當、廉署中人有涉嫌不法情事，卻昧於良知去維護，則這樣的議員，還幹嗎做下去！
沒有留言:
張貼留言