【文匯網訊】5月25日，香港大律師公會就港區國安立法給美國律師協會去信。6月2日，趙振寰大律師以個人名義對「香港大律師公會去信給美國律師協會」一事表示抗議並發信。
趙振寰表示，香港大律師公會發信並未徵詢其他成員意見。
趙振寰指出，根據《基本法》，香港本應就國家安全立法。過去11個月香港受黑暴影響深重，感謝中央政府此時提出「港區國安法」立法。
趙振寰強調，香港事宜無需美國插手，奉勸美國先管好自家後院着火的事。
信件全文如下：
Protest against HK Bar Association letter
to American Bar Association
Dear Ms. Judy Perry Martinez,
(President of the American Bar Association)
I am a member of the Hong Kong Bar Association of over 30 years standing, with no political partisan affiliation.
I just received copies of a letter written in the name of the Hong Kong Bar Association to you dated 25th May 2020 expressing concern for the proposed National Security Law for HKSAR, and your reply letter dated May 29, 2020 expressing support.
I regret to say that the letter of the Hong Kong Bar Association dated 25th May 2020, enclosing a Statement on the above cited subject, were written without any prior consultation of its members, but issued by a Bar council whose political inclination was manifest through their past acts or omission. If I may be allowed to raise my dim but firm voice of protest here, the letter and the Statement of the Hong Kong Bar Association do not represent my view, a feeling shared by many barristers, and citizens, in Hong Kong.
Reluctantly, I feel compelled to question the impartiality of the Hong Kong Bar Association here. I am aghast, for example, that in a recent violent physical attack on the 24th May by the so called 「peaceful protestors」 against the proposed national law on a solicitor who was present in a public place, not a word of denunciation has so far been made by the Hong Kong Bar Association for such s serious crime perpetrated on one of our legal colleagues by politically motivated thugs. This may be contrasted with the position of the Hong Kong Bar Association last year when it issued a quick condemnation of police violence (while arresting suspects) by a statement dated 3rd September 2019 in respect of an occurrence 3 days before in an underground station. The open condemnation was based merely on some incomplete video footage which revealed only part of an on-going incident of mob violence. When queried on this, the Bar Chairman said the council members』 「professional experience」 could bridge the gap in evidence – an assertion which, I must say, would raise the eye brows of any right-thinking common law lawyer. I must confess that I was not aware the common law having been developed to such advanced level in Hong Kong.
Sadder still, as far as I can see, the Hong Kong Bar Association is currently engaged in a campaign in inviting global interference into Hong Kong affairs in the name of the 「Rule of Law」 on matters which they consider objectionable, instead of seeking to endeavor to hold a constructive dialogue with mainland China, the sovereign power of Hong Kong. It makes me wonder if it is customary for the American Bar Association to seek the assistance of, say, the Indian Bar Association on national sovereignty issues which you happen to disagree with the US Government?
The salient fact is that under Article 23 of the Basic Law, Hong Kong is supposed to enact a national security law to protect the perfectly legitimate interests of Hong Kong and mainland China. Sadly, however, a full 23 years have passed since the enactment of the Basic Law, and the past inertia of the Hong Kong legislature has led to the growth of a subversive anti-China political climate in Hong Kong so that it is now unrealistic to expect that Hong Kong can by itself discharge its constitutional obligation to enact the security law locally. In a way, the 「peaceful protesters」 who brought serious violence and damage to Hong Kong in the past 11 months only had themselves to thank for the proposed national security law by the Central Government. And if I may be allowed to say this, instead of helping to alleviate the unfounded fear held by some against the so-called 「Chinese tyranny」, the Hong Kong Bar Association appears to have chosen a different course which in my view does not help, but only exasperates the situation.
I do understand, and subscribe to the concept of comity among common law lawyers. However, I would suggest your American Bar Association』s time is currently better spent on watching out for the human right situation at home which appears to be fast and seriously deteriorating. From the information I gather, and from the history of the treatments by the US Government of the minority black people there, I hope I would not be accused of bias to say that there is strong evidence that the 「Rule of Law」 and the value of 「Equality under the Law」 are no more than mere lip service paid by the United Statement Government to a very large section of the US public. It is to this that I think your esteemed Association should seriously urge the United Statements Government to redress and rectify.
Last, but not lease, please do not even attempt to 「urge the United States Government to influence or encourage the growth of demotics instigation or the rule of law [in Hong Kong』] as stated in your letter dated 29th May 2020. The fact is the recent events have revealed that the US Government cannot even put its own Rule of Law into practice, and your house is on fire. We need no more trouble in Hong Kong, and need no interference from any foreign body, least of all from the US Government, in our own internal affairs, legal or otherwise.
Thank you.
Yours faithfully,
Simon Chiu
2902 Bank of America Tower,
Central, Hong Kong.
Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2020
責任編輯：Ivy