Human Rights Issue 09 《人權》第九期

免費派發 FREE TO TAKE

ISSUE 09 SPRING 2014 / www.amnesty.org.hk

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL & CULTURAL RIGHTS

01/15

02/15

01 WORDS FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF 02 AI GLOBAL CAMPAIGNS IN FOCUS: ECONOMIC, SOCIAL & CULTURAL RIGHTS 03 OVERVIEW 05 INTERVIEW: BROTHER WAH & UNCLE PING FROM KWU TUNG VILLAGE 07 INTERVIEW: IMPACT OF CSSA 7-YEAR RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT ON NEWLY ARRIVED WOMEN 08 TIMELINE: ESC RIGHTS IN HONG KONG 09 INTERVIEW: JUSTICIABILITY OF ESC RIGHTS, KAREN KONG 11 GOOD NEWS LOCAL HAPPENINGS 12 THIS IS YOUR PAGE: CHONG CHAN YAU 13 AIHK CHARITY PREMIERE MANDELA: LONG WALK TO FREEDOM 14 CITIES FOR LIFE: MY BODY, MY RIGHTS VOLUNTEER RECRUITMENT 15 STOP FORCED EVICTIONS

EDITORIAL Mabel Au (Editor-in-chief) Debbie Tsui (Executive Editor) Connie Chan (Editor) Michael Mo (Editor) Angie Tse (Editor) NC Kwong (Editor) COLLATION Hugh Farmer Suki Chung INTERN/VOLUNTEER Jeffrey Lao (Interview) Teresa Ng Kei Kei (Timeline)

AI GLOBAL CAMPAIGNS AI SLOVAKIA Anna Goodson is releasing a collection of over 40 images, calling them “Art Speaks Louder Than Words”, about Russia’s anti-gay propaganda law and violence. Goodson mobilized her international group of illustrators and put out an open call for artwork that showed solidarity with the Russian LGBT community.

EDITORIAL ENQUIRIES +852 2300-1250 editorial@amnesty.org.hk

Copyright Credit: © Phil Wheeler / Anna Goodson Illustration Agency

DESIGN Angeline Chan PHOTO CREDITS Pak Chai PUBLISHER Amnesty International Hong Kong www.amnesty.org.hk PUBLISHING DATE April 2014 All Rights Reserved © This publication is copyrighted and not for resale, but it may be copied or adapted without fee, in whole or in part, provided that all such use is attributed to and registered with the copyright holders.

DISCLAIMER The views expressed or positions taken in the articles contained in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or position of Amnesty International on a particular issue.

AI FINLAND AI Finland activists demonstrated in central Helsinki on 12 January this year, the 12th anniversary of the opening of Guantánamo. Amnesty International is calling for all victims of US human rights violations – including current and former Guantánamo detainees – to have genuine access to meaningful remedy.

Copyright Credit: © Mikko Aarnio

Printed on FSC certified paper.

WORDS FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Amnesty International Sections decided to strengthen its advocacy work on economic, social and cultural rights and highlighted forced evictions in the International Council Meeting in 2009. As a result, AIHK organized a human rights workshop on forced evictions last year. AIHK invited NGOs, concerned with forced evictions, from Taiwan, Malaysia, South Korea and Hong Kong and discussed how to apply international human rights standards on the right to adequate housing and ban on forced evictions in the context of developed societies so as to enrich our knowledge about ESC rights.

We would like to share with you our knowledge about ESC rights in this feature.

AI JAPAN Hakamada Iwao is one of the most pressing death penalty cases in Japan and has been on death row since 1968. On 14 January, Hakamada's elder sister and the AI Japan Executive Director visited the Shizuoka District Prosecutor’s office and submitted 41,327 signatures to ask for a retrial of Hakamada. The signatures were collected by AI Australia, AI UK, AI Netherlands, AI Germany and AI Japan. The Shizuoka District Court will decide whether the court should resume a retrial in this case by the end of March.

Copyright Credit: © AI Japan

03/15

04/15

IN FOCUS

ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS OVERVIEW OF ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL (ESC) RIGHTS The International Bill of Human Rights consists of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which are the foundation of international human rights law. UDHR was passed by The United Nations (UN) General Assembly in 1948 and serves as a checklist of universal human rights. ICCPR and ICESCR were passed by the UN in 1966 and serves as the international human rights standard for reviewing implementation in State Parties.

EXAMPLES SHOWING CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS AND ESC RIGHTS ARE INTERRELATED

Right to food

+

Democracy

Right to adequate housing

+

Freedom of speech

CONTENTS OF ESC RIGHTS ICESCR stipulates the international human rights standards of ESC rights. The Covenant rights include equality and nondiscrimination, which is the core principle of international human rights treaties, right to enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work, right to social security, right to adequate standard of living, right to enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, right to education and right to take part in cultural life etc.

Right to election

+

ESC rights

CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS AND ESC RIGHTS ARE EQUALLY IMPORTANT Due to differences of ideologies and cold war,1 UN protects human rights by ICCPR and ICESCR respectively. However, human rights are universal, inalienable, indivisible, interdependent and inter-related. Civil and political rights carry the same importance as ESC rights.2 It is stated in the ICESCR preamble that “The ideal of free human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his ESC rights as well as his civil and political rights”.

Nobel laureate Amartya Sen opined substantial famines did not occur in democratic society because of accountability of democratic elected government and free press.

The right to adequate housing does not only include shelter. It is integrally linked to respect for human dignity, subsistence, legal protection against forced eviction, expression of cultural identity, freedom of speech, assembly, information and participation in public policy.3 The UN ESCR Committee stated in its concluding observation of Hong Kong in 2011 that “while the ultimate aim is the election of all the members of the Legislative Council by universal suffrage (article 68, Basic Law), the Committee notes that the current arrangements for the election of the Legislative Council include some undemocratic features which impede the full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights in HKSAR”. It also expressed concern that “The Public Order Ordinance may be used to restrict trade union activities, such as peaceful campaigns to promote labour rights”.

PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE REALIZATION

ROLE OF COURT IN PROTECTING ESC RIGHTS

While ICCPR requires immediate obligation, ICESCR adopts progressive realization, which is stated in Article 2 that the State Parties “undertake to take steps”, ”to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the Covenant”. The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural rights explained in General Comment No.3 that it recognized resource restraints and at the same time imposes obligation for State Parties to “move as expeditiously and effectively as possible” towards the full realization of ESC rights.

The Court of Final Appeal stated in the recent main judgment of the Kong Yun Ming case that “the Court has a duty to intervene only where the impugned measure is manifestly without reasonable foundation” (Para 41). Justice Bokhary cited Professor Yash Ghai and Professor Johannes Chan in the concurring judgment that “in countries with an established tradition of constitutionalism, the rule of law is acceptable because economic and social rights are woven into the fabric of public law” (Para 167). He also cited John Humphrey that “human rights without social and economic rights have little meaning for most people” (Para 167). He stated that the right to social welfare is a constitutional right in Hong Kong and “socio-economic ones no less than other ones, rest with the courts”.

While the “courts are not ideally equipped to undertake resource allocation”, they “cannot decline to intervene if the legislative (or administrative) scheme in question fails to accord people the basic necessities to which they are constitutionally entitled” (Para 147).

And for retrogressive measures, the ESCR Committee stated in General Comment No.3 that “any deliberately retrogressive measures would require the most careful considerations and would need to be fully justified by reference to the totality of the rights provided for in the Covenant and in the context of the full use of the maximum available resources”. Justice Bokhary cited Sandra Liebenberg and Professor Karen Kong’s views in his concurring judgment of the Kong Yun Ming case in Hong Kong that “claims involving a deprivation of basic needs should attract a high level of judicial scrutiny”.

Stricter test and “a heavier burden to justify potentially retrogressive measures” will be imposed on the government. (Para 180)

INTERNATIONAL MECHANISM PROTECTING ESC RIGHTS As ICESCR stipulates the international human rights standard of ESC rights, the State parties are obliged to implement ICESCR. UN ESCR Committee is the treaty body responsible for monitoring the implementation of ICESCR through regularly hearing, issuing concluding observations with lists of concerns and recommendations after hearing, issuing general comments which are authoritative interpretive instrument of the Covenant. Besides, the Optional Protocol to ICESCR entered into force in May 2013, which allows the ESCR Committee to receive and consider individual communications concerning State Party which has ratified the protocol.

ESC RIGHTS PROTECTION IN HK FOOTNOTES

IIias Bantekas, Lutz Oette (2013) International human rights law and practice. “International human rights law and notions of human rights: foundations, achievements and challenges”. Cambridge University Press. Page 23.

2 Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. Adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna. 25 June 1993. Para 5.

3 UN ESCR Committee. General Comment No. 4: right to adequate housing. 1991.

1

REFERENCE

Certified true copies of ICESCR in 1967 with different languages including Chinese. https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1976/01/19760103%2009-57%20PM/Ch_ IV_03.pdf Fact Sheet No.16 (Rev.1). The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. 1991.

Fact Sheet No.33. Frequently asked questions on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. 2008.

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Practice: The Role of Judges in Implementing Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Edited by Yash Ghai and Jill Cottrell.

INTERIGHTS, 2004.

Karen Kong. “Social Justice and Social Rights in Hong Kong: Recent Judicial Review Developments and Proposal for Legislative Change”. Socio-Economic Rights in Emerging Free Markets: Comparative Insights from India and China, 2013. University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2013/025

ICESCR has been applicable in Hong Kong since 1976. After the 1997 handover, ICESCR was applicable in Hong Kong as stated in Article 39 of the Basic Law. The Hong Kong government is obliged to regularly hand in reports and attend UN hearings.

Chapter 3 of the Basic Law stipulates fundamental rights of Hong Kong residents including ESC rights like freedom to choose occupation, freedom to engage in academic research, literary and artistic creation, right to social welfare, freedom of marriage and right to raise a family etc. It shows that ESC rights are constitutional rights. If such rights are infringed, citizens may seek justice through judicial proceedings by relying on Basic Law and the International Covenants.

BACKGROUND: WHAT IS THE KONG YUN MING CASE ABOUT? Rights: Constitutional right to social welfare Judgment: Kong Yun Ming v The Director of Social Welfare, FACV 2/2013,17/12/2013 Summary: 1. Article 36 of the Basic Law protects “a right to the social welfare benefits under the CSSA Scheme as it stood on 1 July 1997 (with a qualifying condition of one year’s residence)”. The government has power to modify the social welfare benefits according to Article 145 but subjects to proportionality test and cannot be “manifestly without reasonable foundation”.

2. The Court of Final Appeal ruled that the 7-year residence requirement was unconstitutional. It “was not rationally connected to the declared aim of ensuring sustainability of the social security system, or was a measure which was manifestly without reasonable foundation”. For instance, it “conflicted with the one way family union policy” and “population policy aimed at rejuvenating the ageing populations”. Only insignificant savings were achieved after introducing the requirement. (Press Summary Para 3-4)

05/15

06/15

Brother Wah

INTERVIEW

BROTHER WAH AND UNCLE PING FROM KWU TUNG VILLAGE In Hong Kong, residents living in rural and urban areas are subjected to land resumption and forced eviction for the purpose of development. In 2017, the government will start the North East New Territories Development Project, which means residents living in non-indigenous villages in Fanling North and Kwu Tung North will be forced to leave their homes. Their right to adequate housing will be infringed.

Q: Amnesty International Hong Kong A: Brother Wah from Kwu Tung Village

Q: WOULD YOU SHARE WITH US THE HISTORY OF KWU TUNG? A: There were hundreds of Guang Dong people living in Kwu Tung in the Song dynasty and may deem as miniature of Kwu Tung Village. Kwu Tung Village has existed for more than a hundred years. However, Kwu Tung Village was not recognized as indigenous village by the Colonial government. This may be due to the late submission of required documents at that time.

Q: WHAT WAS THE KWU TUNG COMMUNITY LIKE? A: We had crops, livestock, a school, a clinic and a bazaar and were a self-sufficient community. In the early days many of the villagers farmed for a living. We had more than 50 kinds of vegetables, rice, wheat and grain. Villagers went to Tsuen Wan or Mong Kok on foot or by bicycle to sell vegetables. After the establishment of Kwu Tung Vegetable marketing and credit co-operative society in 1960s, the society delivered villager’s crops to Cheung Sha Wan market to sell till now. Many of the “New Territories vegetables” stated in the menu of “Cha Chaan Teng” (tea restaurant) were from Kwu Tung before. In 1980s, there were lots of factories in Kwu Tung including those making sauces and leather etc. Many villagers worked in factories nearby.

The circular road (Castle Peak Road - Kwu Tung) was once a bazaar with approximately 200 shops selling pork and vegetables groceries, stores, herbal medicine etc and 4 restaurants. Only one tenth of the shops are present now and all of them have been moved to the new market. There was a school changing from “Oi Wah Private School” in 1950s to “Ku Tung Public Oi Wah School” in 1960s where the land was purchased by the villagers and the school was constructed with a government subsidy. However the school was shut down in 2007 because of short-falls in number of students. Kam Yick restaurant is the only restaurant which is still in the same location. It has been the space for villagers’ gathering for about 50 years.

There were training grounds, fields for firing and grenade nearby.

Kwu Tung is also the place for martial arts film or TV drama shooting in 1970s-80s.

Q: HOW DOES THE NORTH EAST NEW TERRITORIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AFFECT THE VILLAGERS? WHEN DID YOU KNOW ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT? A: The government planned to build a “smokeless environmental city” in Kwu Tung in 1990s. After the 1997 handover, the government changed its idea to “city of university” but it was halted because of financial crisis and SARS. The property developers have been reserving land in Kwu Tung. In 2005, the government built Kwu Tung station of Lok Ma Chau Spur Line for development. The current North East New Territories Development Project is highly confidential and we only know we are forced to move at last stage.

The government only tells us about the project in general such as eligible persons may get either ex-gratia compensation or in-situ re-housing of public housing. But it does not tell us the details such as the definition of in-situ, arrangement for waiting period etc. It does not address our needs.

Q: WHAT ARE THE WORRIES OF VILLAGERS FOR THE FUTURE? A: We are anxious about losing our homes, social network, tremendous change of mode of life, hard to adapt the fast pace of life outside the village particularly for the elderly villagers. For instance, a 90-year-old villager has been living in Kwu Tung for most of her life. She still farms every day and it supports her living. If land resumption is carried out under the Development Project, she will lose her farmland, subsistence mode and spiritual sustenance. She cannot stay in her familiar home for her whole life. Her family will be very worried of her. Besides, we are also worried about the cats and dogs in our village.

Uncle Ping: I am an old man. I moved to a public housing estate because of land resumptions in Kwu Tung. However, I could hardly adapt to my new urban life in public housing compared to village life. It was relatively noisy and light. I could not fall asleep. Finally I moved back to village by staying in the abandoned house of other villagers. Before land resumption, I used to drink tea with my elderly friends. They moved to public housing because of land resumptions for building circular road too. Many of them committed suicide or passed away within 3 years. They could not adapt to such as big change from rural life to unfamiliar city life and became very stressful.

Q: WHAT ARE THE DEMANDS OF KWU TUNG VILLAGERS? A: (1) We insist “No moving, no demolition”. It is the result of two referendums by villagers. (2) The government plans to carry out land resumption in 2017. The Lands Department has begun freezing surveys recently. Apart from jumping steps by the government while the project has not been passed by Town Planning Board, we are very discontented that the government did not notify us about the start of freezing surveys.

Q: WHAT IS THE SIZE AND POPULATION OF KWU TUNG VILLAGE? A: Kwu Tung village was once the biggest village. The land of Kwu Tung South is now high-end house. The size of Kwu Tung North is around 400 hectares. There are more than 20 small areas in the village though some of them have been abandoned. There were more than 50,000 villagers in the heyday of Kwu Tung Village (1970-80s) while there are 5,000 villagers now. Many of us are from Hakka and Chiu Chow with different surnames. We speak Cantonese. Traditionally we worship Kwun Yum (Goddess of Mercy). In the heyday of Kwu Tung Village, we had large scale activities to celebrate Kwun Yum’s birthday such as having a bamboo theatre for Cantonese and Chiu Chow opera and Pun Choi (big bowl) banquet. Sun Ma Sze Tsang, the famous Cantonese opera singer, was invited to perform for us. But now the scale is reduced to Pun Choi banquet.

Photo Credit: Pak Chai@Northeastern New Territories Style

07/15

08/15

IMPACT

TIMELINE

OF CSSA

7

-YEAR RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT

YEUNG MEI Organizer, the New Arrival Women League

ON NEWLY ARRIVED WOMEN

FROM THE MAINLAND Mon Ching (anonym), a Mainland woman, fell in love and raised a family with a Hong Kong man. Years later she resided in Hong Kong with a one-way permit with their baby son. She discovered her husband was bankrupted and homeless. Her husband said he could not take care of her and their child and suggested she seek help from the government.

Mon Ching became homeless. She could not stay in a shelter because she was not a domestic violence victim. Every time she asked the social workers for help, she was scolded and told to go back to the Mainland with her son. She said she felt very stressed and cried a lot as she was very unfamiliar with Hong Kong and was always being blamed though she was in need. She said her son was born in Hong Kong and did not have household registration in the Mainland, which made it very difficult for him to have access to education in the Mainland.

As she did not meet the CSSA 7-year residence requirement, she was not able to get CSSA financial aid even though she was in great financial difficulty and could not sustain her basic needs.

She instead lived on CSSA for her Hong Kong-born child to pay the rent and tuition fees. She went to a food bank for food assistance or collected rotten vegetables in a wet market.

Later with help from the New Arrival Women League (Tonggen), she was granted CSSA discretion if she worked 120 hours per month and obtained a certification letter showing continuous work from her employers. But she had to take care of her young child and found difficulty in fulfilling this requirement. She worked for 3 hours a day in a tea restaurant when her child was at school during weekdays. Sometimes she might to apply for leave if her child had

school holidays during weekdays. Employers did not welcome such short working hours and she had had to change jobs a few times.

Yeung Mei, the Organizer of the New Arrival Women League, said the CSSA 7-year residence requirement created hardship for newly arrived women who could not sustain their basic needs. She opined that the discretion did not have clear standards and it had a high threshold. For some cross border families, Hong Kong husbands did not work because of sickness, unemployment and being disabled while the newly arrived women did not work because they needed to take care of the husband or young children. Some newly arrived women were victims of domestic violence, but they did not have access to information and did not know they could apply for discretion.

POSTSCRIPT CSSA 7-year residence requirement unduly affected the newly arrived women. In a 2004 Tin Shui Wei family murder case, domestic violence victim Kam Shuk Ying and her twin daughters were killed by her husband. When Kam resided in Hong Kong with a one-way permit for family union, her husband was unemployed and asked the social worker to increase CSSA. However, CSSA was reduced as her husband lost the eligibility of single parent financial aid and Kam did not fulfill the 7-year residence requirement. Quarrels among the couple increased in their poverty-stricken life. Kam was beaten by her husband several times. The 7-year residence requirement led to a family crisis.1 1 Chong Yiu Kwong. “Struggle to survive but failure to escape from death: Death Inquiry into Tin Shui Wei Family Tragedy�. Five years after Tin Shui Wei Domestic Violence Tragedy: turn grief into power. Association for the Survivor of Women Abuse (Kwan Fook). 2010. Page 98-99. (Chinese)

09/15

10/15

INTERVIEW

JUSTICIABILITY OF ESC RIGHTS KAREN KONG ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR FACULTY OF LAW, THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

Q: Do you have any comments on the approach of justificiability of ESC rights in Hong Kong courts?

A: (1) In the past, the court took a very conservative attitude like regarding ESC rights as aspirational and promotional. In the early stages, judges were reluctant to decide issues concerning policies.

They applied a great degree of deference to the government.

(2) There had been a stage where judges used equality rights enshrined by Article 25 of the Basic Law to indirectly guarantee ESC rights. But they applied high degree of deference when government socio-economic policies were involved. The court also used administrative law procedural safeguards including legitimate expectation, reasonableness, procedural fairness, breach of statutory rules to indirectly protect ESC rights.

(3) The Kong Yun Ming case is the first case where the court directly uses ESC rights and adopts proportionality approach in reviewing and giving effect to ESC rights.

(4) So there have been major developments of ESC rights protection in Hong Kong courts over the years.

IMPLICATION OF KONG YUNG MING CASE REGARDING ESC RIGHTS PROTECTION Q: While the court expressed reluctance to adjudicate government socio-economic policies in the Fok Chun Wah case, why was there a change of attitude in the Kong Yun Ming case?

A: The court’s approach was more hands-on and pro-active in the Kong Yun Ming case compared to the past. It is more willing to review the justifications and evidence provided by the government. It requires the government to have strong reasons to justify retrogressive measures. For instance, it will scrutinize the figures provided by the government on expenditure on CSSA on new Mainland immigrants. This is unlike in the past where the court gave a high degree of deference to the government. Although the court still gives sufficient respect to the government, it will intervene only when the government policy is manifestly without reasonable foundation.

Q: Amnesty International Hong Kong A: Karen Kong

Q: Will ESC rights protection including the right to social welfare turn society into welfare society?

A: ESC rights protection is different from welfare society. For example, the aim of social welfare is to satisfy basic needs for dignified life. The government has a fundamental obligation to offer money or material assistance to the needy to fulfill basic needs at times of disability, being elderly, being unable to work and natural disasters etc. Besides, ICESCR is applicable in different political and economic systems.

Q: In what ways ESC rights are protected by constitution and court?

A: ESC rights are constitutionally guaranteed as fundamental rights. In some countries, such as India, they are non-enforceable directive principles of state policies. Usually the new constitutions offer more protection of ESC rights, while the old constitutions will read into existing civil and political rights and offer indirect protection for ESC rights. For instance, right to life is adopted in India’s right to food campaign; right to health is protected through equality right in the case in Canada of Eldridge v. British Photo credit: Jimmy Wan

Q: How important is Justice Bokhary’s judgment as he is the only judge adopting ICESCR in the Kong Yun Ming case?

Columbia (Attorney General), which concerned the provision of interpreter service for those hearing impaired at public hospitals; right to contributory social welfare is read into property right in the European Court of Human Rights.

Q: What are the main challenges for the court in protecting ESC rights?

A: (1) The court’s attitude towards reviewing policy decisions of government in light of separation of powers principle. (2) The expertise of the court in dealing with social science evidence. (3) It also depends on the court’s understanding of ESC rights. Some judges view ESC rights as positive rights and lesser than negative rights like liberty. They have less experience in dealing with it.

Q: Are there any good practices?

A: Good practices should be kept in line with international human rights development and standards including general comments issued by ESCR Committee. The optional protocol of ICESCR is now in force, so there is no doubt about enforceability of ESC rights.

A: Justice Bokhary’s judgment is obiter. He also mentioned that he could decide the case without referring to ICESCR. However, his judgment still serves a very important function and has great significance. He recognized the content of ICESCR and the ESCR Committee’s general comments including progressive realization of ESC rights and assumption against retrogressive measures.

He referred to the ESCR Committee’s general comments and concluding observations on Hong Kong, thus recognized the status of ICESCR in influencing domestic decision making in court.

Q: The Hong Kong court once opined ICESCR as aspirational and promotional. Does the Kong Yun Ming case have any implications about that?

A: Obviously ESC rights are now treated as enforceable in Hong Kong courts. In this case the court made its decision based on Article 36 of the Basic Law and did not address this issue. But it only waits for a chance for the court to formally overrule that position when there is a direct point at issue before the court.

Q: Do you have any comments on the opinion that the Kong Yun Ming case will serve as precedent which may affect the restriction of social welfare on non-permanent residents including public housing or may impose a long term impact on Hong Kong finance like Director of Immigration v. Chong Fung Yuen?

A: (1) The court will look at factors like availability of resources and the socio-economic condition at the time. The Kong Yun Ming case does not mean all social welfare has to be equalized between Hong Kong permanent residents and Hong Kong nonpermanent residents. But the government needs to have good justification when restricting welfare to Hong Kong permanent residents; particularly when it involves a retrogressive measure.

The government will need to formulate a more coherent and comprehensive policy and take into account the human rights implications of the policy decisions.

(2) Moreover, the definition of social welfare is not clearly defined in the Basic Law. In the Kong Yun Ming case, CSSA was regarded as welfare as it involved basic needs. It depends on the court whether public housing falls within the meaning of welfare, or some other rights like the right to adequate housing, which may be subject to different treatment as it is not an expressed right under the Basic Law. The nature of CSSA and public housing are different, as the former involves direct money subsidy while the latter one involves land supply. Furthermore, the residence requirement of public housing was 7 years before 1997. It does not involve any retrogressive measures as in CSSA.

Q: Would you share with us your prospects of ESC rights protection in Hong Kong?

A: My initial thought is the adoption of social impact assessment whenever the government formulates and implements social policy. For instance, before the government determined to extend the residency requirement from 1 to 7 years for CSSA, it should study whether the policy is proportional, discriminates, has an impact on disadvantaged groups and if there are any alternative measures and if it they are the least intrusive measure. Besides, the government should make more effort in promoting ESC rights and public education.

GLOSSARY General Comment: The UN treaty body provides authoritative explanations on Covenant rights or State Party’s obligations through general comment.

Optional protocol: It is optional to State Party for ratification. It “complements and adds to an existing human rights treaty” including procedural mechanism such as individual complaint system and substantial issue which have not been addressed in current Covenants.

(ESCR-Net, “Section 2: Improving Supervision of the ICESCR: an optional Protocol”, http://www.escr-net.org/docs/i/425247) Positive & Negative Rights: Positive rights usually involve resources and actions needed to fulfill the rights while negative rights usually require the parties not to interfere or act against the rights.

11/15

12/15

GOOD NEWS

LOCAL HAPPENINGS THIS IS YOUR PAGE: CHONG CHAN YAU WHY DO YOU SUPPORT AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL?

USA KIMBERLY RIVERA RELEASED FROM PRISON

Kimberly Rivera was granted early release from her 10 month prison sentence on 12 December, 18 days after giving birth to her fifth child.

Kimberly Rivera was arrested and detained by US military authorities in September 2012 for desertion from the army.

She had left the army without authorization while on leave from deployment to Iraq in early 2007 after deciding that given her moral convictions she could no longer participate in the war in Iraq or any other conflict.

RUSSIA PUSSY RIOT MEMBERS FREED

Maria Alekhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, members of the Russian band Pussy Riot, were released from imprisonment before Christmas 2013. The release is 3 months ahead of their official sentence. We thank all of our supporters who have backed their peaceful means of expression in the past two years.

The international human rights campaigns Amnesty International conduct reach places where human rights of various issues are being neglected. Their individual voice goes beyond all barriers, be it race or any other background. Hence, whenever there is a case of human rights violation, Amnesty International will represent anyone who cannot speak up for themselves and this is why I support Amnesty International.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE CANDLE THAT REPRESENTS AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL STANDS FOR? The candle represents light, a symbol for justice, and should be visible to all people because justice is for all people. Yet, the barbed wire represents how human rights are suppressed in many places and requires light to fight the injustice.

CHONG CHAN YAU

President of the Hong Kong Blind Union

HOW WOULD YOU PERSUADE YOUR FRIENDS TO BECOME PART OF OUR HUMAN RIGHTS MOVEMENTS?

UKRAINE

BANGLADESH

DETAINED PROTESTERS RELEASED ON BAIL

NO TORTURE RISK FOR NEWSPAPER EDITOR MAHMUDUR RAHMAN

6 of the 9 street protesters unfairly detained in Ukraine have been released under bail conditions or house arrest.

Yuriy Bolotov and Vladyslav Zagorovko who confessed to participation in mass disorder, have been fined 75 Euros and released. Yaroslav Prytulenko remains in detention.

After having been transferred from jail to Tejgaon police station in the capital, Dhaka, on 4 December, Mahmudur Rahman was produced before a magistrate and sent back to jail on 8 December. He is not currently at risk of torture.

I haven’t intentionally persuaded my friends to become part of the movement as I believe it is more important to understand the value of human rights itself and we need to uphold our rights by practicing it. Here in Hong Kong, we are in a better position than many places, say the Mainland, and if we don’t understand and treasure our human rights, we may lose this important value.

IF YOU WERE GRANTED THE POWER TO WISH AWAY ONE HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE, WHAT WOULD THAT BE? Human rights is not something that can be dealt with individually, it is an entire concept that is indivisible from one item to the other. Although the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations categorizes human rights into many aspects, it is in fact a single concept that is inter-related with one another. Therefore we must protect our freedom of expression so that we can continue to speak up for human rights.

13/15

14/15

CITIES FOR LIFE FOR A WORLD WITHOUT THE DEATH PENALTY 30 November is “Cities for Life” World Day. It started at 1pm in East Point Road, Causeway Bay. AIHK joins over 1,625 cities around the world celebrating abolition of the death penalty and campaigning for a worldwide end to state killing.

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE DAY

Installation: “Last Words in the Dark” Exhibition and signature collecting on Xia Junfeng & Cheng Hsing Tse Guest Speakers: “From the Queen to the Chief Executive” - Director Herman Yau, Lawmaker Leung Yiu-Chung, Kong King Chu Performance & Sharing by ex-death row inmate Mandy Co-organisers: Amnesty International Hong Kong, The Community of Sant’Egidio, Joint Committee for the Abolition of the Death Penalty and The Justice and Peace Commission of the Hong Kong Catholic Diocese.

Left: former death row inmate Mandy

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL HONG KONG CHARITY PREMIERE

MANDELA: LONG WALK TO FREEDOM Singer Mr. Anthony Wong, President of the Hong Kong Blind Union Mr. Chong Chan Yau, Director of Centre for Civil Society Studies of the Chinese University of Hong Kong Professor Chan Kin Man, and Campaign Officer of Hong Kong Unison Ms. Annie Li attended the opening ceremony by joining a toast to a discrimination free world. Apart from our guests and supporters, university students, youths from ethnic minorities, refugees, disabled groups and migrant domestic helpers have also been invited to take part in the premiere. We hope the long walk to freedom of Nelson Mandela can inspire their lives and to motivate them to fight for equality in future.

Mandela stood together with the people in his non-military struggle and never forgot his followers. Although youths at that time chose other means to fight against the system, Mandela attempted to guide them patiently. Eventually, he successfully abolished the apartheid policy in South Africa in 1994 and built a peaceful and harmonious nation. Amnesty International hopes that Mandela’s perseverance in fighting for equality can inspire youths to devote themselves to building a equal society and to believe that the power of individuals can make a difference in the world.

Although anti-discrimination laws have been established in Hong Kong, there are still cases of discrimination and human rights violations in our society. However, if we persist in fighting against inequality, the current situation will be improved, to demonstrate what Mandela said: “It always seems impossible until it’s done”.

MY BODY, MY RIGHTS VOLUNTEER RECRUITMENT In Burkina Faso, women can be refused contraceptives at health clinics unless they are accompanied by their husbands. In Morocco, girls can be forced to marry their rapists to preserve family honour and “protect” the attacker from prosecution. Over 150,000 women travelled to the UK from Ireland for a termination between 1980 and 2012 because abortion there is illegal unless the woman’s life is at serious risk. And in many countries, loving someone of the same gender – or simply dressing outside the social norm – is enough to land you in jail.

Through My Body, My Rights (MBMR) campaign, we break the silence. If you are interested in defending sexual and reproductive rights, stand up and join us. We will expose states that violate these rights and demand change.

MBMR Group will bring you: training on sexual and reproductive rights, empowerment, and campaign opportunities. You will get into global issues of sexuality, sex/gender, sexual rights as human rights.

Registration: volunteer@amnesty.org.hk Open to all gender and sexual orientations. Campaign experience not required.

All volunteers must be Amnesty International HK members. You will be asked to register later. Membership fee: $20 (full-time student), $100 (individual).

15/15

15/15

停止強迫遷拆

STOP

FORCED EVICTIONS 圖片：龍@新界東北style Photo: Lung@Northeastern New Territories Style

，

本會希望藉此機會

。

再一次感謝各界支持

，

本會希望藉著播映

。

自由之路》慈善首映 —

，

、

。

，

，

， 。

，

，

、

、

，

。

。

。

volunteer@amnesty.org.hk 歡迎所有性別及性傾向人士參加 不需有舉辦活動的經驗

；

，

必能改善現時情況

所有參加小組的義工必須成為國際特赦組織香港分會會員 加入小組後將獲入會表格 入會費為全日制學生二十港元或 個人會員一百港元

。

報名

，

只要我們堅持推動本港的平權運動

，

。

。

。，

雖然香港已有四條反歧視條例 但歧視和侵犯人權問題仍然存在 曼德拉曾說 「看似不可能的事 只要堅持到底就能成真 」

每年十一月三十日為「世界城市廢除死刑日」 當天一時開始 國際特赦組織香港分會及其他 團體在銅鑼灣東角道行人專用區舉行活動 與全球 一千六百二十五個城市共同爭取全球邁向廢死之路 當日活動精選 裝置展覽：「黑暗中最後一話」 圖片展覽：死囚夏俊峰及鄭性澤個案 並收集簽名 嘉賓講者：《等候董建華發落》導演邱禮濤 梁耀忠 議員及江瓊珠對談死刑 以及前死囚文錦棠表演及 分享

，

，

，

，

，

。，

小組義工 MY BODY, MY RIGHTS ，

。

在布基納法索 女性只有在丈夫陪同下 才可從診所取得避孕藥 在摩洛哥 性侵受害者被強迫嫁給強暴者 以維護家族面子和「保護」強暴者免遭檢控 從一九八 ○ 年至二 ○ 一二年 超過十五萬名女性從愛爾蘭遠赴英國墮胎 因為 在愛爾蘭 女性只有在嚴重生命危險時才可墮胎 在很多國家 愛上同性 或僅僅只是穿衣比較「脫俗」 足以讓你判刑

，

運動 打破沉默 如果你對捍衛性權與 讓我們透過倡議 My Body, My Rights (MBMR) 生育權有興趣 請加入我們 一同揭露這些國家的侵權情況 推動改革 。

。

。

。

，

誠徵

合辦團體：國際特赦組織香港分會 聖艾智德團體 取消死刑聯合委員會 香港天主教正義和平委員會

，

、

。

，

世界城市廢除死刑日

，

，

。

：

，

。

。、

，

參 加 MBMR 小組 你會得到性權與生育權的人權專業訓練及改變世界的機會 你將有機會接觸有關性 性別 性權的全球人權議題 、

，

、

、

。

，

。

《曼德拉 《曼德拉 — 自由之路》慈善首映已於一月十四日完滿結束 曼德拉自傳改編而成的電影 呼籲大眾關注反歧視活動 ，

是次開幕禮由國際特赦組織香港分會執行委員會主席徐國偉先生聯同著名歌手黃耀明先生 香港失明人協進會主席莊陳有 先生 香港中文大學公民社會研究中心主任陳健民副教授及香港融樂會倡議主任李敏小姐共同主禮 主禮嘉賓在典禮完結前 一同祝酒 為自由乾杯 亦祝願香港社會能早日消除歧視 此外 我們亦邀請了難民 外傭 少數族裔及傷健人士等出席 希望藉著曼德拉的傳奇一生 鼓勵他們日後在平權之路出一分力 令香港變得更平等 ，

曼德拉一生致力推動南非成為種族平等的和諧社會 他以非暴力抗爭的方法 與人民站在一起 即使面對一群與他追隨共同 理想 卻採取不同形式抗爭的年青人 曼德拉仍然耐心引導 最終 曼德拉在一九九四年推翻了南非種族隔離政策 令國家 邁向平等 本會期望曼德拉對平權運動的堅持 能夠啟發一眾青年人 為未來邁向平等共融的社會出一分力 並讓他們相 信 只要堅持信念 人民的力量是可以改變世界

、

，

，

，

、

。

，

，

，

，

，

。

，

，

，

，

：

13/15 14/15

11/15 12/15

好消息

孟加拉 新聞編輯脫離酷刑險境

我從來沒有刻意說服我的朋友參與運動 因為我相信最重要的是了解 人權本身的價值以及需要透過實踐來維護我們的權利 在香港 我們 已比許多地方較好 例如中國大陸 因此 如果我們不理解和珍惜 人權 我們可能會失去這個重要價值

， 。

俄羅斯

，

。

；

，

，

成員獲釋 Pussy Riot 於十二月四日 孟 加 拉 新 聞 編 輯 Mahmudur Rahman 由監獄被押到首都達卡的 Tejgaon 警署 經過法院審判 後 他於十二月八日遭送回監獄 現時 他在獄中未 有受到酷刑威脅

。

，

，

，

，

成員 Maria Alekhina 和 樂隊 Pussy Riot 經歷接近兩年 Nadezhda Tolokonnikova 流放式監禁後 於二〇一三年聖誕節 前夕獲釋 比原來刑期提早三個月出 獄 我們感謝各位支持者於過去兩年 來為她們發聲 用行動聲援這隊和平 表達意見的樂隊

烏克蘭 示威者保釋候審

。

九名被不公拘禁的示威者 其中六名獲得保釋或於 家 中 軟 禁 等 候 受 審 兩 名 示 威 者 Yuriy Bolotov 和 向局方承認「擾亂公眾秩序」 Vladyslav Zagorovko 後 繳付約七十五歐元罰款後獲釋 而另一名示威者 則仍被扣留 Yaroslav Prytulenko ，

，

。

美國

。

，

獲釋 Kimberly Rivera

。

，

於獄中產下第五 良心犯 Kimberly Rivera 名嬰孩後十八日 於十二月十二日獲 釋 結束其十個月的獄中生涯 她於 二〇一二年九月被美國軍方拘捕及扣 留 她於二〇〇七年初決定拒絕到伊 拉克服役 同年在未獲上級批准之下 離開軍隊 並決定不參與任何戰事 以逃過良心責備

，

。

，

。，

，

本地迴響 莊陳有 香港失明人協進會會長

，

。

人權並不是可以單獨處理的獨立問題 它是整體而不可分割的概念 儘管聯合國《世界人權宣言》看似將人權分類 但實際上它是互相 連繫的單一概念 目前 我們必須保護我們的言論自由 令我們能 繼續為人權發聲 ，

，

，

如果可以願望成真，而只能許一個願，你會選擇解決甚麼人權問題？

，

。。

。

，

，

。

，

。

你的一頁：莊陳有專訪

為何你會支持國際特赦組織？

。

蠟燭代表光明 亦是公義的象徵 蠟燭本應被所有人看到 因為公義 屬於大家 可是綑綁蠟燭的荊棘表達人權在許多地方仍然受到壓制 所以需要光來對抗社會上的種種不公義 ，

你會如何遊說朋友加入我們的人權運動？

，

，

，，

，

國際特赦組織的人權運動涉及多方面遭受忽視的人權議題 是超越 地域界限的國際性運動 國際特赦組織秉持獨立聲音 只要人權受到 壓制 不論任何種族或背景人士 組織也會為他們挺而發聲 我支持 國際特赦組織的原因正正是因為他們代表原本無法發聲的人民 說出 他們所關注的事情 。

你認為國際特赦組織的蠟燭標誌代表甚麼？

，

，

。

，

。

09/15 10/15

良好做法須符國際人權標準及發展 譬如參考聯合國經濟 委員會）的《一般性意見》 最近公約任擇議定書已生效 性質 而是可執行

有沒有良好做法可供參考？

，

。

，

；

。，

、

社會與文化權利委員會（下稱經社文權利 已有申訴機制 反映經社文權利並非推廣

。

一 以往香港法院持保守態度 視經社文權利為啟導及推廣性質（如陳吐歡案及陳美儀案） 起初 法院不願介入政府政策決定 裁量餘地很大 二 後來 法院以《基本法》第二十五條保障的平等權利 間接保障經社文權利 涉及政府社會經濟政策時 依然採取較大裁量餘地 法院亦採用行政法保障程序 公義 譬如合理期望 合理性 程序公正與否及違反法定責任 以間接保障經社文權利 令其有較多 法律保障 三 孔允明案是首個法院直接使用經社文權利及相稱性測試審議的經社文權利案例 甚為 進步 因此 香港法庭保障經社文權利 有顯著發展

你對香港法院審理經社文權利的態度有何評論？

、

法庭在霍春華案表明不宜介入政府社經政策， 孔允明案則不然。為何會有如此轉變？

孔允明案對經社文權利保障的啟示

，

。

，

，

相比霍案 法庭在孔允明案更積極主動更介入 法庭較願意審理政府提供的理據 要求政府提供強而 有力的理據 證明綜援居港年期規定由一年增至七年如此倒退政策的合理性 此外 法庭詳細檢視政府 就新移民的綜援支出數據 這與從前法院採取高度尊重原則 (high degree of deference) 不同 從前不會 如此仔細審視政府理據 而是認同政府 法院在孔允明案依然尊重政府 只在政府政策「明顯沒有合理 基礎」才介入

，

，

。

，

，

，

，，

，

包致金法官的判決屬附帶意見 並無約束力 他亦提到他可在不引用經社文權利公約的基礎下判政策 違憲 雖然如此 包致金法官的附帶意見非常重要 他確認經社文權利公約內容及《一般性意見》 譬如逐步實現社會福利權利及倒退政策的假設 他引用經社文權利委員會《一般性意見》及就香港的 審議結論 確認經社文權利公約的地位 並為日後法院討論經社文權利框架舖墊

在孔允明案，包致金法官是唯一引用經社文權利公約 的法官。其判決的重要性為何？

。

香港法院曾指經社文權利公約屬「推廣」及「啟導」性質。 孔允明案有否改變此看法？

，

現時法院已明顯視經社文權利為可執行 在孔允明案 法院裁決是基於《基本法》第三十六條 而不是 直接處理「推廣」及「啟導」性質 所以未有正式推翻 若日後有案件直接觸及經社文公約地位問題 才有機會正式推翻

。

有評論指，孔允明案將成先例，影響其他對非永久居民社會福利的限制， 如公屋，或如莊豐源案長遠影響香港財政。你有何評論？

，

， 香港法院會檢視當時資源能力及經濟社會環境等因素 孔允明案並不表示所有社會福利必須平等適用於 永久居民及非永久居民 但政府必須有合理理據支持政策只限於永久居民 尤其在倒退政策上 政府需 制定統一及全面政策 並考慮決策所包含的人權議題 ，

。

《 基 本 法 》 並 無 清 晰 定 義 社 會 福 利 綜 援 和 公 屋 性 質 不 同 在孔 允 明 案 綜 援 屬 滿 足 最 基 本 生 活 需 要 的 社會福利 這取決於法院如何解釋 公屋是否《基本法》所指「社會福利」 或是其他權利如適足住屋 權 由於《基本法》並無訂明住屋權 因此法院會有不同處理 前者牽涉直接金錢援助 後者牽涉土地 供應 再者 公屋政策在一九九七年前 規定申請人須居港七年 並非倒退政策

你對香港保障經社文權利有何展望？

，

。

、

，

，

。

，

，

，

、

。

人物專訪

國際特赦組織香港分會 江嘉恩

香港大學法律學院助理教授江嘉恩 問 答

保障經濟、社會與文化權利（下稱經社文權利）， 例如社會福利權，會否變成福利主義？ 兩者並不等同 社會福利旨在保障基本生活需要 政府有根本責任在殘疾 年老 失去工作能力及災難 等情況下 向有需要人士提供金錢或物質援助 以維持基本生活 另外 保障經社文權利的《經濟 社會與文化權利的國際公約》（下稱經社文權利公約）適用於不同政治經濟體制

法院如何保障經社文權利？有何難處？

。

有些憲法訂明經社文權利為基本權利 有些國家如印度則在指導性原則訂明 通常較新的憲法更為 保障經社文權利 而歷史悠久的憲法會透過公民和政治權利間接保障經社文權利 譬如以生存權保障 食物權 見於印度食物權運動 又如加拿大法院 Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General)裁定 政府未有為聾人在公立醫院提供免費傳譯服務 有違平等權利 間接保障健康權 歐洲人權法庭以財產 權保障人人享受社會保障供款的權利等

法院保障經社文權利時有何困難？

，

一 視乎法院在三權分立原則下如何解讀審理政府政策 譬如法院決定的是法律問題 而非代替政府 決定資源分配 二 法院處理社會科學證據的專業知識 三 法院對經社文權利的認識 部分法官或視 經 社 文 權 利 為 積 極 權 利 不 及 消 極 權 利 如 公 民 權 利 重 要 前 者 需要 政 府 投 放 資 源 及 行 動 實 現 權 利 後 者 多是要求政府不要阻礙權利 法院處理經社文經驗較少 需要積累

，

，

。

，

，

、

，

辭彙簡介

，

。

。

(General Comment)

。

。

，

。

。

，

一般性意見

。

。

公約機構藉此解釋公約條文和締約國 責任 以協助締約國和公眾理解及實 現公約權利

，、

。

。

、

(Optional Protocol)

，、

，

，。。

，

，、

、

。

、，

，

任擇議定書

。

，

。

，

、

，

。

，

任擇議定書由締約國選擇是否批准 適用 旨在增補原有公約的內容 包 括訂明公約程序 如個人申訴機制 新增公約未有涵蓋的人權議題 如有 關廢除死刑的《公民權利和政治權 利國際公約第二號任擇議定書》

，

。

，

，

，

(ESCR-Net, “Section 2: Improving Supervision of the ICESCR: an optional Protocol”, http://www.escr-net. org/docs/i/425247)

、

。

，

，

，

。

。

，

(Positive & Negative

，

，

，。

，

。

積極及消極權利

；

。

。

，

Rights)

：： 、

，

、

，

。

。

初步想法是政府在制定政策時 應採用社會政策評估 保障弱勢社群 譬如將綜援居港限制年期由一 年增至七年 決策前應審視方案是否不合乎比例 有否歧視身分 對弱勢社群的影響 有否其他替代 措施 是否侵害人權最小程度的方案等 此外 政府應更重視和推廣經社文權利 加深公眾認識

照片：Jimmy Wan

，

，

。

，

； 。

，

，

，

，

。

，

前者通常需要投放資源及採取措施以 實現權利 後者通常要求政府或他者 不作干預 以實現權利 。

，

，

。

，，

。

、

，

，

07/15 08/15

，

，

，

。

。

、，

，

。

。

。

，

。

居於中國大陸的望晴（化名）與一位香港男 士相戀 並結婚生子 後來她獲發單程證來 港 才發現丈夫已破產 露宿街頭 丈夫建 議她帶同在港出世的年幼兒子向政府求助

同根社組織幹事楊媚表示 以往綜援七年 居港規定對未能維持基本生活的新移民婦 女造成困境 而酌情權無明顯標準 並有過 高限制 部分中港家庭的丈夫患病 失業或 傷殘 新移民婦女需照顧丈夫或年幼子女而 未能外出工作 亦有新移民婦女是家暴受害 人 但欠缺資訊 不知如何求助 。

，

綜援七年居港規定對新移民婦女影響尤深 二 ○○ 四年天水圍家暴受害人金淑英及女兒 同遭丈夫殺害 及後丈夫自殘並不治 慘劇 背景是金淑英丈夫當時正值失業 獲發單親 綜援 當金淑英持單程證來港一家團聚 丈 夫要求社工增加綜援 但社署反而取消其單 親綜援 同時金淑英又不符領取綜援資格 一家生活拮据 爭拗頻生 丈夫屢次虐打金 淑英 七年居港規定是基層家庭被邊緣化 的其中原因

後記

，

，

，

望晴因不是家暴個案而無法入住庇護中心 她多次向社工求助 卻屢遭責罵 社工更著 她帶兒子返大陸投靠親人 可是兒子沒有大 陸戶籍 難以在大陸就學 她既無處容身 又求助無門 覺得很大壓力 經常哭泣

。

，

。

，

。，

，

。

。

。

、

，

，

。

。

，

由於望晴不符綜援七年居港規定 即使生活 困頓 亦無法申請綜援 主要依靠兒子的綜 援支付租金 學費及生活費等 平日到食物 銀行領取食物 或到街市執爛菜

，

，

1

，

，

。

，

，

，

，

後來她在同根社協助下獲批綜援酌情權 但 須每月工作一百二十小時 並提供由僱主發 出的繼續工作證明 雖然她現在趁兒子上學 到茶餐廳兼職三小時 但有時因照顧兒子需 要而請假 僱主並不體諒 已換了幾份工 ，

，

。

，。，

，

。

，

。

，

。

莊耀洸律師 〈奮鬥求生 難逃一死 — 記天水圍滅門案 死因研訊〉 《天水圍家暴慘劇往後五年：化悲憤為力 量》 群福婦女權益會 年 頁 98-99 2010 1

，

，

，

，

綜援七年居港規定 對新移民婦女的影響

時序

楊媚 同根社組織幹事

人物專訪

古洞村華哥、平叔 前文提到適足住屋權包括尊重尊嚴 生計 兼顧居民生活方式 社區網絡 文化身分表達 免遭迫遷 言論自由 結社自由 獲取資訊和參與公共決策 權 在香港 居於新界及市區居民同樣面對收地逼遷的威脅 二 ○ 一七年 政府將會啟動新界東北發展計劃 粉嶺北和古洞北等非原居民村村民正面對 痛失家園的威脅 國際特赦組織香港分會 古洞村華哥

。

、

、

、

、

，

答 宋末已有數百粵人聚居古洞附近 可以說是古洞村雛形 古洞村有百多 年歷史 早於一八六 ○ 年《新安縣志》已有記載 聽說當年未及限期前遞交 所需資料 港英政府並無確認古洞村為原居民村

、

、

，

、

。

、

，

問：可否簡單介紹古洞村歷史？

問 答

。

：：

。

，

。

答 古洞村曾是版圖最大的村 古洞南原有土地現已成豪宅天巒 現時 古 洞北面積約四百公頃 有記載的小區逾廿個 部分已荒廢 古洞村全盛時期 （七 八十年代）有逾五萬人 目前大約五千人 村民多是廣東客家人及 潮州人 是雜姓村 用廣東話溝通 村民拜觀音 有民間觀音廟 最風光 時 觀音誕會搭台做粵劇和潮劇 並設盤菜宴 粵劇名伶新馬師曾也來過 表演 後來規模縮小 只做盤菜宴

。

，

，

問：古洞村面積和人口為何？

：

，

。

，

。

。

。

，

答 以前古洞有農作物 畜牧 學校 診所及市集 完全可以自給自足 那時古洞務農為主 有五十多款蔬菜 有稻米 麥及禾 最初 村民徒步或 踏單車到荃灣或旺角賣菜 六十年代古洞蔬菜合作社成立 運送村民農作物 到長沙灣菜市場售賣 昔日市區茶餐廳餐牌的「新界油菜」 許多是來自 古洞 八十年代 工業起飛 古洞多了許多工廠 如醬油 皮革廠等 大部 分村民轉而到工廠上班 現在的環迴公路曾是市集 有二百間店舖 包括 四間茶樓 豬肉 雜貨 士多 藥材及水電等 現在只剩下十分一 大部分 都搬去新街市 那時有醫院 也有學校 五十年代是愛華私塾 六十年代是 古洞公立愛華學校 由村民出錢買地政府資助興建 但於二 ○○ 七年因殺校 而關閉 錦益茶樓是唯一無改地址的茶樓 五十年來都是居民聚腳地 古洞 附近亦有馬房 練兵場 練靶場 手榴彈場等 除了練靶場仍然運作 其他 地方已改變用途 古洞亦曾是電影或粵語武俠劇拍攝外景的地方

問：古洞是怎樣的社區？

，。

，

。

，

。，

，

，

，

：

、

，

。

，

、。

、

。

，

、

。

答 早於九十年代 政府已計劃在古洞興建無煙城 主權移交後計劃興建 大學城 但因金融風暴及沙士擱置 那時地產商囤地 交通漸漸頻仍 二 ○○ 五年興建落馬州支線古洞站 也是為了發展 今次新界東北發展計劃 保密 我們在最後階段才知要滅村 現時 政府只有籠統說法 如合資格 人士可獲六十萬特惠補償或原區安置上公屋 但無交代詳情 如何謂原區 通過公屋入息審查也要輪候 中空期有何安排等 完全忽視村民訴求 村民 前路茫茫

問：新界東北計劃如何影響村民？ 你們何時得知計劃？

，。

，

，。

，

，

，

，

，

，

。

、

，

，

。

，

、

，

，

，

。

，

、

、

、

。

、

，

，

。

、

。

、

。

、

：

。

。

，

、

，，

，

，

，

，

答 我們擔心失去家園和社區網絡 擔心改變生活模式 擔心難以適應外面 緊張生活 尤其老村民 譬如有位村民 是九十歲老婆婆 大半生在古洞 生活 每日打理兩塊田 留在古洞自給自足 一旦收地 她頓失農地 無法 維生 失去精神寄託 亦無法在熟悉的環境安居終老 也會令家人憂心 我們也擔心村裡的貓狗

問：村民對日後生活有什麼憂慮？

。，

。 、

，

。

，

。

，

：

，

，

，

平叔 那時我因收地 搬到上水屋邨 無法 適應 因為很吵很光 難以入眠 後來只有 搬回其他村民空置的樓房 那時和我一起喝 茶的老友記 也因市集收地而上樓 難以適 應新環境 很抑鬱 放不下 三年內許多老 友記過身 不是自殺就是病死

，

。

，

，，

，

，

，

。

。

，

，，

問：古洞村村民有何訴求？

。

，。

。，

，

：

，，

，：

答 我們堅持「不遷不拆」 「不遷不拆」 是村民兩次公投的決定 政府打算二 ○ 一七 年收地逼遷 近日地政署已開始人口凍結 登記 撇開未過城規會政府偷步問題 政府 事前並無告知村民開始人口凍結 我們感到 十分不滿 圖片：柏齊@新界東北style

05/15 06/15

。

，

：

，

。

，

。

。

。

，

，，

，

專題

經濟、社會與文化權利概談 《世界人權宣言》 《公民權利和政治權利國 際公約》及《經濟 社會與文化權利的國際 公約》（下稱《經社文權利公約》）合稱國際人 權憲章 是國際人權法的基礎 前者於一九四八 年聯合國大會通過 儼如普世人權清單 後兩者 則於一九六六年聯合國大會通過 是檢視各國的 普世人權標準 諾貝爾經濟學獎得主阿瑪蒂 亞森指饑荒常見於獨裁專制 社會 因為欠缺民主政府及 出版自由的監察制衡

公民、政治與經社文權利 環環相扣的事例

食物權 + 民主

適足住屋權

逐步實現原則 與《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》立即實現權 利不同 《經社文權利公約》第二條提到「逐 步實現」原則 即締約國「承允盡其資源能力 所及」 「採取種種步驟」 「務期以所有適當 方法」 「逐漸使本公約所確認之各種權利完全 實現」 聯合國經社文權利委員會於第三號《一 般性意見》指此原則確認資源局限 同時亦規定 即時責任 締約國有責任盡可能迅速和有效完全 實現公約權利 至於倒退政策 聯合國經社文權利委員會於 第三號《一般性意見》指締約國作出倒退政策需 要最慎重考慮 須有充分理由 顧及完整公約權 利 並充分利用所有可能資源 包致金法官在 孔允明案中同意判決引述學者意見 當倒退政策 損害基本需要時 需嚴格審視並充分保障權利 政府務必以更高舉證責任證明倒退政策合理（段 一百八十） 。

聯合國保障經社文權機制

。

經社文權利內容 + 言論自由

住屋權不僅是有瓦遮頭 還 包括尊重尊嚴 生計 兼顧 居民生活方式 社區網絡 文化身分表達 免遭迫遷 言論自由 結社自由 獲取 資訊和參與公共決策權

，

。

，

。，，

，

締約國有責任落實《經社文權利公約》 而聯合 國經濟 社會與文化權利委員會是公約機構 負 責監察各國實施公約的情況 包括定期審議各締 約國實施公約報告 審議後制訂審議結論 訂明 關注事項及改善建議 制訂一般性意見 為 公約 作出權威解釋 二 ○ 一三年五月始 公約任擇議 定書生效 設個人申訴機制 適用於已批准任擇 議定書的締約國

，

Fact Sheet No.16(Rev.1). The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.1991.

Fact Sheet No.33. Frequently asked questions on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. 2008.

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Practice: The Role of Judges in Implementing Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Edited by Yash Ghai and Jill Cottrell. INTERIGHTS, 2004.

Karen Kong. “Social Justice and Social Rights in Hong Kong: Recent Judicial Review Developments and Proposal for Legislative Change”. Socio-Economic Rights in Emerging Free Markets: Comparative Insights from India and China, 2013. University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2013/025

，

選舉權 + 經社文權

聯合國經社文權利委員會亦 一一年審議結論 在香港二 ○ 中提到關注立法會選舉安排 並不民主 妨礙市民充分享 有經社文權利 亦關注《公 安條例》可以限制工會爭取 勞工權的和平行動

多數人意義甚微」（段一百六十七） 「享受社 會保障屬香港憲制權利 而社經權利與其他憲制 權利同樣重要 法院有責保障」 「雖然法院並 不善於處理資源分配 但當立法或行政措施無法 保障憲法所保護的基本需要 法院必須介入」 （段一百四十七）

背景資料：孔允明案關於甚麼？ 權利：社會福利憲制權利 案件：孔允明訴社會福利署署長 FACV 2/2013, 17/12/2013 概述：《基本法》第三十六條保障「香港居民有 權按綜援計劃於一九九七年七月一日的情況（居 港一年規定） 享受綜援下的社會福利待遇」 政府有權按第一百四十五條修改待遇限制權利 但須符相稱性測試 並不能「明顯沒有合理基 礎」 終審法院一致裁定綜援七年居港規定 違憲 「與政府聲稱目的 即確保社會保障制 度的可持續性 並無合理關連 並無明顯合理 基礎」 譬如七年居港規定有違單程證家庭團聚 及年輕化人口政策 「證據顯示節省金額微不足 道」 （中文摘要段三及四）

，

聯合國《經濟、社會與文化權利的國際公約》一九六七年認證副本，內有多國語言，包括中文手 寫本。 https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1976/01/19760103%2009-57%20PM/Ch_IV_03.pdf

參考資料

，

，

，

其中 《經社文權利公約》訂明經濟 社會與 文化權利的國際標準 包括國際人權公約要旨 「人人平等 無所歧視」 享受公平與良好工作 條件 社會保障 適足生活水平 最高標準之身 體與精神健康 接受教育權及參加文化生活 享 受文藝或科學的權利等

《維也納宣言和行動綱領》

，

，

，

，

。

、

，

、

、

、

3

，

，

。

公民和政治權利與經社文權利 同樣重要 基於意識形態分歧及冷戰背景 聯合國分別 以《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》及《經社文 權利公約》保障各項人權 然而 人權是普世 不可分割 相互依存及相互聯繫 公民和政治權 利及經社文權利同樣重要 《經社文權利公 約》前文亦昭示「唯有創造環境 使人人除享有 公民及政治權利而外 並得享受經濟社會文化權 利 始克實現自由人類享受無所恐懼不虞匱乏之 理想」

香港保障經社文權依據 《經社文權利公約》於一九七六年適用於香港 一九九七年主權移交後則按《基本法》第三十九 條適用於香港 香港政府須定期向聯合國提交報 告 並接受審議 《基本法》第三章訂明保障香港居民基本權利 與經社文權利有關包括選擇職業 學術研究 文 藝創作 享有社會福利 婚姻自由和自願生育的 權利等 由此可見 經社文權利屬憲制權利 若 上述權利受到侵犯 市民可依據《基本法》及 《公約》條文透過司法覆核申訴

香港法院保障經社文權的角色 最近 終審法院在孔允明案指出法院保障經社文 權的角色 終審法院在多數判決指若政府社經 政策「明顯沒有合理基礎」 法院有責任介入 （段四十一） 包致金法官在同意判決中引述佳 日思教授及陳文敏教授指「在已確立憲政傳統的 國家 法治是可以接受 因為公法包含經社文 權利」 又引述《世界人權宣言》其中一位起草 人 John Humphrey 指「沒有社經權利的人權 對

維也納世界人權會議 一九九三年 段五

《第四號一般

，

，

。

、

，

、、 ，。

、

、、、

，

，

，

，

，

、

，

，

，

，

、

1

，

，

，

。

，

、

。

2

，

聯合國經濟 社會與文化權利委員會 性意見 適足住屋權》 一九九一年

。

，

，

、

。

，

、

，

，

、

、

，

。

。

，

，，

，

、

。

。。

，

、

。

，

，，

。

。

。

，

，

、、

，

。

。

。

IIias Bantekas, Lutz Oette. (2013) International human rights law and practice. “International human rights law and notions of human rights: foundations, achievements and challenges”. Cambridge University Press. Page 23.

註釋

。

、

，。

。

、

、

，

、

。

。、

，

，

，

，

、

，

，

，

，

：

。

1 2 3

。

，

經濟、社會與文化權利概談

03/15

04/15

01/15 02/15

01主編的話 02全球人權運動 專題：經濟、社會與文化權利 03概談 05專訪 古洞村華哥 平叔 — 綜援七年居港規定對新移民婦女的影響 07專訪 — 08時序 香港爭取經社文權利案件一覽 法院保障經社文權利 江嘉恩 09專訪 — 11好消息 本地迴響 12你的一頁 莊陳有專訪 自由之路》慈善首映 13《曼德拉 — 14世界城市廢除死刑日 義工 14誠徵 MY BODY, MY RIGHTS 15停止強迫遷拆

主編 執行編輯 編輯 編輯 編輯 編輯

芬蘭分會

柏齊

封面照片鳴謝 新界東北 style

實習生及義工

出版

www.amnesty.org.hk

國際特赦組織香港分會

一四年四月 ○

出版日期 二

，

版權所有 不得轉售 如欲以 任何方式複製或改編本出版物 或其任何部份 必須列明出處 以及通知版權持有人 ，

本出版物所包含的文章 內容 及其所反映的立場或觀點並不 能代表國際特赦組織在某特定 議題上的立場或觀點

免責聲明

。

。

劉駿暉（訪問） 吳崎崎（時序）

Copyright Credit: © AI Japan

，

。

本刊物以森林管理委員會認可 的紙張印製

為了要求重審袴田嚴案 袴田嚴姊姊及國際特赦組織日本分會 總幹事於一月十四日前往靜岡縣地區檢察官辦公室 遞交由澳 洲分會 英國分會 荷蘭分會 德國分會及日本分會總共收集 得的四萬一千三百二十七個簽名 靜岡縣區域法院將於本年三 月底決定是否允許重審該案 袴田嚴於一九六八年入獄 是日 本其中一位囚禁最久的死囚

日本分會

。

。

。

、

。。

、

編輯部查詢 +852 2300-1250 editorial@amnesty.org.hk 設計 陳信忻

今年一月十二日 一班來自芬蘭分會的人士於首都赫爾辛基市 中心抗議關塔那摩監獄啟用十二周年 國際特赦組織認為所有 遭美國侵犯人權的受害者 包括曾經或現在關押於關塔那摩監 獄的人士 應獲真正具意義的補償 ，

，

。

編輯部 區美寶 徐嘉穎 陳文慧 巫堃泰 謝德愛 鄺念終 校對

Hugh Farmer

鍾明麗

斯洛伐克分會

：

。。

Copyright Credit: © Phil Wheeler / Anna Goodson Illustration Agency

，

Copyright Credit: © Mikko Aarnio

，

、

。

、

@

發佈「藝術勝於雄辯」四十多幅插圖 以抗議 Anna Goodson 俄羅斯反同性戀宣傳法及針對跨性別人士的暴力政策 Anna 動員其國際創作團隊 以插圖作品聲援俄國的同志社群 ，

：

全球人權運動

：

，

、

主編的話 本 會 全 球分 會在 二 ○○ 九年國際大 會上共同決議 今後將加強經濟 社會與文化權利的倡議工作 並以 強迫遷拆為重點 因此 香港分會 於去年舉辦關於強迫遷拆的人權工 作坊 邀請台灣 馬來西亞 韓國 及香港關注強迫遷拆的維權團體 一起探討如何以保障居民免受強迫 遷拆的國際人權標準 去理解在亞 洲較為發達的經濟體系語境下的適 足住屋權 藉以豐富經社文權利的 知識 今期專題紀錄有關經社文權 利的倡議經驗 誠與各位分享 ，

。

，

，

，

、

，

，

、

。

，

。

、

，

免費派發 FREE TO TAKE

ISSUE 09 SPRING 2014 / www.amnesty.org.hk

經濟、 社會 與文化權利