雖然這篇disturb中文鄉民發文沒有被收入到精華區:在disturb中文這個話題中,我們另外找到其它相關的精選爆讚文章
在 disturb中文產品中有7篇Facebook貼文,粉絲數超過23萬的網紅健吾,也在其Facebook貼文中提到, 各位,生成器也許已沒有用了。選管會一天就收到4500封電郵。看來,大家炸他電郵還是有點用的。 以下乃沈大師言為「內部AO提供範本」。的確是官話文章,請先仔細閱讀,才選擇是否發出電郵吧。 你還有5小時。 请广传,好人一生平安。 [#官方資訊] 早前分享了一位高級政務官朋友就《逃犯條例》...
同時也有5部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過16萬的網紅Edwin H.,也在其Youtube影片中提到,iOS 12有咩新搞作?分半鐘講完! WWDC 2018 舊iphone效能提升 Measure App AR USDZ Shortcut+Siri Do Not Disturb Enhanced Tongue Detection Memoji Subscribe! https://www.y...
「disturb中文」的推薦目錄
- 關於disturb中文 在 Lifelong Animal Protection Instagram 的最讚貼文
- 關於disturb中文 在 月巴氏~ Instagram 的最佳貼文
- 關於disturb中文 在 健吾 Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於disturb中文 在 Kai Chi Leung 梁啟智 Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於disturb中文 在 劉倩怡 Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於disturb中文 在 Edwin H. Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於disturb中文 在 Subyub Lee Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於disturb中文 在 PhoenixBlack Youtube 的最佳解答
disturb中文 在 Lifelong Animal Protection Instagram 的最讚貼文
2020-05-09 20:19:22
Violet (2YO)🐶 : I'm looking for my forever home. Don't disturb me please. I'm very gentle with dogs & humans. Who would like to give a chance to me? ...
disturb中文 在 月巴氏~ Instagram 的最佳貼文
2020-05-03 01:36:43
[Do Remember! You Disturb Me Creating, Your...] 近日先後收到幾位讀者PM,咁啱都係問我:甚麼是創意? Well,這是一個好多人答過的問題。但好多人答過,不代表易答,或答對。 霎時間實在答不來(也不想亂咁答),但可以先講出兩個重點。 1.「創科局」不是有...
-
disturb中文 在 Edwin H. Youtube 的最讚貼文
2018-06-05 12:41:53iOS 12有咩新搞作?分半鐘講完!
WWDC 2018
舊iphone效能提升
Measure App
AR USDZ
Shortcut+Siri
Do Not Disturb Enhanced
Tongue Detection
Memoji
Subscribe!
https://www.youtube.com/user/wing912930?sub_confirmation=1
Follow my instagram!
https://www.instagram.com/edwinghui/ -
disturb中文 在 Subyub Lee Youtube 的最讚貼文
2017-10-11 18:14:43有無試過唱K唱到悶
開始對住啲中文歌詞直譯英文呢?
一齊學識呢首,
下次唱K一齊唱!
字幕組:Tim Tim Wong
10月22 現場唱呢首好唔好?
李拾壹 一次性音樂會
Subyub Lee "Everything is Temporary"Live
日期| 22/10/2017 (日)
地點| MOM Livehouse (北角英皇道117-121號七海購物中心B39)
時間| 20:00
票價| $250 (全企位)
門票| https://goo.gl/BSo3Xf
主辦單位| Milkshake Music,3721 Productions
*我們不設實體門卷,只有一次性電子兌換碼,當日親臨現場出現電郵即可進場,既方便快捷又符合主題。
一次性現場樂隊: 小綠帽偵探社
______________________________
Deep Ng - First in be main
吳浩康 - 先入為主
Is me do wrong Is me do wrong Is me do wrong
是我做錯 是我做錯 是我做錯
What do u want?
你要什麼
Tho the cost is expensive I dont care
縱費用昂貴 在所不計
Only want to wash out old mistake
只想洗去舊過失
Accumulated a container
累積一貨櫃
Hated scolded punished
恨也恨過 鬧也鬧過 罰也罰過
Global is what
還求什麼
Although i cant hold u in my arms
我縱是無法被你抱住
At least let me stop from falling
都起碼讓我停住跌勢
You remember I was unfaithful
你 記住我當初 不忠誠
Dont believe me today in love with stable
不相信今天我 愛上安定
Me facing you how to guarantee?
我 對住你 怎保證
So enough power to prove me
至夠力證明我
Already fixed sex
已是定了性
Joey Yung - Pain Love
容祖兒 痛愛
Loving you let me fall down
喜歡你讓我下沉
Loving you let me Cry
喜歡你讓我哭
Continue being ruined also satisfied
能持續獲得糟蹋亦滿足
Loving you treat me thin emotion
喜歡你待我薄情
Loving you being so cool
喜歡你為人冷酷
What if you realize
若是你也發現
You like treat me like s**t too
你也喜歡虧待我
I will let you forever pain loving me
我就讓你永遠痛愛著我
Subyub Lee - Dead wait
李拾壹 死等
I afraid one taste wait
我最怕一味等
I afraid one taste wait
我最怕一味等
Nothing happen
冇嘢發生
I afraid one taste wait
我最怕一味等
I afraid one taste one person got one person
我最怕一味一個人 得一個人
One taste work hard
一味努力
You also dont patron
但你都冇幫襯
HOCC - Light Club
何韻詩 光明會
Ah Two Ah Two Sunset Ah Two Sunset
啊二啊二啊霞 啊二啊霞
Ah Two Ah Two Sunset Ah Two Sunset
啊二啊二啊霞 啊二啊霞
Ah Two Ah Two Ah What? Ah Two Ah What?
啊二啊二啊吓? 啊二啊吓?
Ah Two Ah Two Ah What? Ah Two Ah Shrimps
啊二啊二啊吓? 啊二啊蝦
薛家燕 - 皆大歡喜
Nancy Sit - Everybody is big happy
Slow walk hold hands walk through ten thousand miles thousand mountain
漫步挽手走遍萬里千山
Faith can score out happy world
信念編出歡欣世間
Hey ouch Hey ouch Hey
唏呀唏呀唏
Hey ouch Hey ouch Hey
唏呀唏呀唏
Together one heart has new opportunity
團結一心有新轉機
Dont care is ten thousand feet wind wave
哪怕是萬尺風浪
Also can hold hand fly to sky
都可挽手沖天飛
Hey ouch Hey ouch Hey
唏呀唏呀唏
Hey ouch Hey ouch Hey
唏呀唏呀唏
Group together share happy land
團聚分享快樂園地
Smile and tears in between you and me
笑與淚在你我之間
Life is full of surprises
人生多驚喜
李彩樺 - 你唔愛我啦
Rain Li - You don't love me la
Is but la counted la no disturb you la
是但啦 算數啦 唔煩你啦
No one Kisses me la
無人錫我啦
Goodbye la Nothing la Real enough la
再見啦 無野啦 實在夠啦
You dont love me la
你唔愛我啦
Is but la counted la said will kiss me
是但啦 算數啦 又話錫我
Say so fast changed treat me how bad
話咁快又變晒待我幾差
Goodbye la Nothing la Ending ga la
再見啦 無野啦 完場啦
You dont love me la
你唔愛我啦
________________ -
disturb中文 在 PhoenixBlack Youtube 的最佳解答
2016-10-03 16:30:01立即訂閱我: https://www.youtube.com/user/Ph0enixB1ack?sub_confirmation=1
下載: http://store.steampowered.com/app/501840/
Batman S02E04: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7iXncAfm2M
Survival Games Ep.11: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKJsCBr6OoA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
如果你喜歡我的影片的話,就請留下一個"喜歡"
如果你想看到更多的內容,不妨按下"訂閱"
你們的每一個"喜歡"和"訂閱"都是支持我的動力!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
【Equipment / 配置】
▶Hardware / 硬件: 留意頻道介紹
▶Software / 軟件 :
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe Photoshop
Adobe After Effects
更多詳情請留意頻道介紹
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
【Personal Information / 個人資料】
▶Facebook Page / 專頁: https://goo.gl/HV0XSy
▶Twitter / 推特: https://goo.gl/ce2mSO
▶Instagram: https://goo.gl/tCYfKP
▶Intro Music / 片頭音樂: Au5 & Fractal - Blue
▶Resource Pack / 資源包: Faithful 32x(Customized)
Production Music courtesy of Epidemic Sound: http://www.epidemicsound.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
disturb中文 在 健吾 Facebook 的最佳解答
各位,生成器也許已沒有用了。選管會一天就收到4500封電郵。看來,大家炸他電郵還是有點用的。
以下乃沈大師言為「內部AO提供範本」。的確是官話文章,請先仔細閱讀,才選擇是否發出電郵吧。
你還有5小時。
请广传,好人一生平安。
[#官方資訊] 早前分享了一位高級政務官朋友就《逃犯條例》爭議的感受,得到數千轉載,迴響十分熱烈,也有不少公務員私訊回應。本頁對象一直以黃藍以外的專業人士為主,雖然平日只分享國際視野資訊,但在關鍵時刻,也希望為一些平日對社會抽離的朋友,提供更多資訊參考。以下是我的另一位AO朋友擔心局勢惡化,希望以自己的方式真正為特區政府服務,因此以私人身份草擬的意見書,回應特區政府選舉管理委員會關於區議會選舉的官方諮詢,並使用了完美官僚理據、格式和文法,就DQ候選人提供了詳細意見。根據官方資訊,《逃犯條例》收到4500份意見書,其中3000份「贊成」,因此發出意見書並非毫無價值。這位AO表示,大家可以直接使用這格式,根據個人觀點加減內容直接電郵遞交,因為香港人大家都忙,這過程只需一分鐘,應該最符合成本效益。截止日期是7月10日或之前,請廣傳,好人一生平安。
10 July 2019
Chairman
Electoral Affairs Commission (EAC)
By Email: eacenq@eac.hk
Dear Chairman,
Public consultation on District Council Election proposed guidelines
I write to object to Chapter 3 of the Proposed Guidelines, as it gives Government an unjust, unfair, and unchecked power to disqualify any candidate during the nomination period by reason of Government’s own political motives.
Chapter 3.1 of the Proposed Guidelines says that : “Under the law, the validity of a candidate’s nomination is to be determined by the Returning Officer (RO). The EAC is neither empowered nor involved in the making of such decision and would not provide any advice on the decision made by the RO”.
Chapter 3.9(b) of the Proposed Guidelines describes the requirement by which a candidate must declare (through signing a “Confirmation Form” by the EAC) that he would uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the HKSAR.
It is totally unclear whether a Confirmation Form duly signed by a candidate is itself sufficient to discharge the candidate’s duty to declare his willingness to uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the HKSAR when he is elected to the office.
Previous elections showed that an RO, who was a civil servant (pitched at Administrative Officer Staff Grade C / District Officer) appointed to the role of RO prior to the election, could make subjective and arbitrary judgment about a candidate’s state of mind and political orientation, with selective reference to some or a few past writings, speeches, statements, expression of opinions, posts in social media platforms in relation to the candidate, instead of merely looking at a Confirmation Form duly signed.
I find it outrageous to see that Ms. Anne Teng, then District Officer (Eastern) appointed to the role of RO in a legislative council by-election last year, could refuse to acknowledge a confirmation form signed by Miss Agnes Chow Ting and disqualify her, citing absurd and arbitrary reasons with reference to some of Miss Chow’s previous remarks or those of her political party, and without giving Miss Chow a fair opportunity to respond to those reasons uttered unreasonably by the RO.
The Proposed Guidelines shows that the EAC has failed its duty to introduce any additional safeguard or measures to plug this unreasonable, unlawful and unconstitutional loophole, which may still be freely exploited by any RO in the next election driven by bad faith and political motive.
It is unacceptable that the EAC could confess that it is “neither empowered nor involved in the making of such decision and would not provide any advice on the decision made by the RO” (Chapter 3.1). I question how the EAC can still “ensure that an election is conducted openly, fairly and honestly at all times” – its statutory duty enshrined in the Electoral Affairs Commission Ordinance - when it is not involved in scrutinising or monitoring the exercise of an RO’s power in disqualifying any candidate at the RO’s own political preference.
The Guidelines did not describe in detail how an RO could, on his or her own, research during the short nomination period the political belief and past sayings of any candidate. The Guidelines are also silent as to whether the RO would have received biased or secret advice from any agency such as Department of Justice, Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, Home Affairs Department, Information Services Department, etc., which may have compiled a detailed recollection of a candidate’s previous remarks in advance. It was suggested by some that such a compilation of speech or opinion records prepared by any agency other than the RO could have assisted the RO unlawfully in reaching a dangerous disqualification decision to deprive a candidate of the right to stand for the election.
I must remind the EAC that the right to stand for election is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Basic Law and the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. The United Nations Human Rights Committee’s General Comment 25 also states that “political opinion may not be used as a ground to deprive any person of the right to stand for election.”
I am disappointed to see that the proposed Guidelines have not offered anything substantive to protect a candidate from the RO’s unlawful interference in the election by disqualifying candidates he or she dislikes. The EAC must look at this carefully to see what it can do.
The current remedy about determining the lawfulness of an RO’s disqualification decision through an election petition to be adjudicated later by the court one or two years after the actual election is totally unsatisfactory, with the lapse of time which delays the timely delivery of a just outcome.
I stress that I object to Chapter 3 of the Proposed Guidelines in its entirety. I urge you to review all the processes described in Chapter 3 again and independently. In so doing, you must resist all political considerations wrongly dictated by the Chief Executive, Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, Department of Justice, or other government agency seeking to disturb the fairness and integrity of the forthcoming district council election.
Yours sincerely,
XXXX
更新:有熱心網友翻譯為中文版,並對原文作出修訂,請隨便share/修改:
10 July 2019
選舉管理委員會主席 鈞啓
選舉管理委員會主席鈞鑒: 關於區議會選舉活動建議指引公眾諮詢事宜
本人謹致函對建議指引第三章表達反對意見。建議指引第三章將賦予政府不公平、不公正以及不被箝制的權力,容許政府於提名階段取消香港市民的參選資格,以迎合政府自身的政治目的。
建議指引第三章第一部分(3.1)指:「根據法例,候選人的提名是否有效 ,完全是由選舉主任作出決定,選管會無權並一向沒有參與, 亦不會給予任何意見。」
建議指引第三章3.9(b) 要求候選人透過簽署選管會擬備的確認書表明他/她擁護《基本法》並保證對香港特別行政區效忠。
至於候選人是否能夠簽署確認書就能滿足擁護《基本法》並保證對香港特別行政區效忠的要求,建議指引對此完全沒有清晰交代。
過往選舉顯示,首長級丙級政務官/民政事務專員級別的公務員於選舉前獲委任為選舉主任,便能夠就候選人的思緒及政治取向作出主觀且隨意獨斷的決定,並只需揀選候選人往日曾經發表的文章、言論、宣言、意見表達、社交媒體帖文以及社交媒體專頁發佈關於對候選人的帖文穿鑿附會,當作輔證,而非僅以候選人是否有簽署確認書為單獨基礎作判斷。
去年立法會補選,時任東區民政事務專員鄧如欣獲委任為選舉主任,居然拒絕周庭小姐簽署的確認書,以周庭小姐及其所屬政黨昔日的言論去佐證選舉主任荒唐的理由,去褫奪周庭小姐的參選資格,並且沒有給予周庭小姐公平機會回應選舉主任的無理指控,實在令人憤慨。
由建議指引可見,選舉管理委員會並無引入任何措施或保障,去堵塞上述不合理、不合法、不合憲的漏洞。今後選舉主任依然可以使用此漏洞,依據其個人的政治目的或理念,惡意褫奪任何香港市民的參選資格。
選舉管理委員會於第三章第一部分(3.1)指:「根據法例,候選人的提名是否有效 ,完全是由選舉主任作出決定,選管會無權並一向沒有參與, 亦不會給予任何意見。」此點完全不可接受。當選舉管理委員會對選舉主任按其個人政治取向褫奪候選人參選資格的權力不作任何箝制、監察或審查, 又能如何履行其法定職責,「確保在香港舉行的選舉是以公開、公平和誠實的方式進行」呢?
建議指引並無對選舉主任如何可於短促的提名期內研究並審查任何候選人的政治理念及昔日言論有任何著墨。 建議指引亦未有論及選舉主任會否收到其他機構的秘密意見或者偏頗意見。上述的其他機構,例如律政司、內地及政制事務局、民政事務總署或政府新聞處等,可能預先詳細記錄相關候選人的昔日言論。據悉,上述由第三方準備的詳細記錄可能不合法地導致選舉主任作出褫奪候選人選舉資格的危險決定。
本人必須提醒選舉管理委員會,被選舉權是獲香港基本法及香港人權法案保障的基本權利。聯合國人權事務委員會第25號一般性意見亦指出:「不得以政治見解為由剝奪任何人參加競選的權利。」
本人對建議指引並未就保障候選人不被選舉主任按其個人喜惡褫奪資格,防止選舉主任非法干預選舉採取任何措施深感失望。選舉管理委員會必須詳細檢視自己對上述問題有何解決方法。
就選舉主任褫奪參選資格的合法性,目前透過選舉呈請,並於選舉完結一兩年後由法庭裁決的安排實在強差人意。當中所耗的時間令公義遲來。
本人對建議指引第三章完全反對。本人懇求主席重新並獨立審視第三章所包含的所有程序。在重新審視的時候,懇請閣下撇除並抗拒所有政治考量,尤其是來自行政長官、政制及事務內地局、律政司及其他政府機構企圖干預未來區議會選舉的誠信和公平性的政治考量。
敬祝 鈞安 XXXXXXXX 敬上
2019年7月9日
disturb中文 在 Kai Chi Leung 梁啟智 Facebook 的精選貼文
學習官僚語言其實好緊要
[#官方資訊] 早前分享了一位高級政務官朋友就《逃犯條例》爭議的感受,得到數千轉載,迴響十分熱烈,也有不少公務員私訊回應。本頁對象一直以黃藍以外的專業人士為主,雖然平日只分享國際視野資訊,但在關鍵時刻,也希望為一些平日對社會抽離的朋友,提供更多資訊參考。以下是我的另一位AO朋友擔心局勢惡化,希望以自己的方式真正為特區政府服務,因此以私人身份草擬的意見書,回應特區政府選舉管理委員會關於區議會選舉的官方諮詢,並使用了完美官僚理據、格式和文法,就DQ候選人提供了詳細意見。根據官方資訊,《逃犯條例》收到4500份意見書,其中3000份「贊成」,因此發出意見書並非毫無價值。這位AO表示,大家可以直接使用這格式,根據個人觀點加減內容直接電郵遞交,因為香港人大家都忙,這過程只需一分鐘,應該最符合成本效益。截止日期是7月10日或之前,請廣傳,好人一生平安。
10 July 2019
Chairman
Electoral Affairs Commission (EAC)
By Email: eacenq@eac.hk
Dear Chairman,
Public consultation on District Council Election proposed guidelines
I write to object to Chapter 3 of the Proposed Guidelines, as it gives Government an unjust, unfair, and unchecked power to disqualify any candidate during the nomination period by reason of Government’s own political motives.
Chapter 3.1 of the Proposed Guidelines says that : “Under the law, the validity of a candidate’s nomination is to be determined by the Returning Officer (RO). The EAC is neither empowered nor involved in the making of such decision and would not provide any advice on the decision made by the RO”.
Chapter 3.9(b) of the Proposed Guidelines describes the requirement by which a candidate must declare (through signing a “Confirmation Form” by the EAC) that he would uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the HKSAR.
It is totally unclear whether a Confirmation Form duly signed by a candidate is itself sufficient to discharge the candidate’s duty to declare his willingness to uphold the Basic Law and pledge allegiance to the HKSAR when he is elected to the office.
Previous elections showed that an RO, who was a civil servant (pitched at Administrative Officer Staff Grade C / District Officer) appointed to the role of RO prior to the election, could make subjective and arbitrary judgment about a candidate’s state of mind and political orientation, with selective reference to some or a few past writings, speeches, statements, expression of opinions, posts in social media platforms in relation to the candidate, instead of merely looking at a Confirmation Form duly signed.
I find it outrageous to see that Ms. Anne Teng, then District Officer (Eastern) appointed to the role of RO in a legislative council by-election last year, could refuse to acknowledge a confirmation form signed by Miss Agnes Chow Ting and disqualify her, citing absurd and arbitrary reasons with reference to some of Miss Chow’s previous remarks or those of her political party, and without giving Miss Chow a fair opportunity to respond to those reasons uttered unreasonably by the RO.
The Proposed Guidelines shows that the EAC has failed its duty to introduce any additional safeguard or measures to plug this unreasonable, unlawful and unconstitutional loophole, which may still be freely exploited by any RO in the next election driven by bad faith and political motive.
It is unacceptable that the EAC could confess that it is “neither empowered nor involved in the making of such decision and would not provide any advice on the decision made by the RO” (Chapter 3.1). I question how the EAC can still “ensure that an election is conducted openly, fairly and honestly at all times” – its statutory duty enshrined in the Electoral Affairs Commission Ordinance - when it is not involved in scrutinising or monitoring the exercise of an RO’s power in disqualifying any candidate at the RO’s own political preference.
The Guidelines did not describe in detail how an RO could, on his or her own, research during the short nomination period the political belief and past sayings of any candidate. The Guidelines are also silent as to whether the RO would have received biased or secret advice from any agency such as Department of Justice, Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, Home Affairs Department, Information Services Department, etc., which may have compiled a detailed recollection of a candidate’s previous remarks in advance. It was suggested by some that such a compilation of speech or opinion records prepared by any agency other than the RO could have assisted the RO unlawfully in reaching a dangerous disqualification decision to deprive a candidate of the right to stand for the election.
I must remind the EAC that the right to stand for election is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Basic Law and the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. The United Nations Human Rights Committee’s General Comment 25 also states that “political opinion may not be used as a ground to deprive any person of the right to stand for election.”
I am disappointed to see that the proposed Guidelines have not offered anything substantive to protect a candidate from the RO’s unlawful interference in the election by disqualifying candidates he or she dislikes. The EAC must look at this carefully to see what it can do.
The current remedy about determining the lawfulness of an RO’s disqualification decision through an election petition to be adjudicated later by the court one or two years after the actual election is totally unsatisfactory, with the lapse of time which delays the timely delivery of a just outcome.
I stress that I object to Chapter 3 of the Proposed Guidelines in its entirety. I urge you to review all the processes described in Chapter 3 again and independently. In so doing, you must resist all political considerations wrongly dictated by the Chief Executive, Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau, Department of Justice, or other government agency seeking to disturb the fairness and integrity of the forthcoming district council election.
Yours sincerely,
XXXX
更新:有熱心網友翻譯為中文版,並對原文作出修訂,請隨便share/修改:
10 July 2019
選舉管理委員會主席 鈞啓
選舉管理委員會主席鈞鑒: 關於區議會選舉活動建議指引公眾諮詢事宜
本人謹致函對建議指引第三章表達反對意見。建議指引第三章將賦予政府不公平、不公正以及不被箝制的權力,容許政府於提名階段取消香港市民的參選資格,以迎合政府自身的政治目的。
建議指引第三章第一部分(3.1)指:「根據法例,候選人的提名是否有效 ,完全是由選舉主任作出決定,選管會無權並一向沒有參與, 亦不會給予任何意見。」
建議指引第三章3.9(b) 要求候選人透過簽署選管會擬備的確認書表明他/她擁護《基本法》並保證對香港特別行政區效忠。
至於候選人是否能夠簽署確認書就能滿足擁護《基本法》並保證對香港特別行政區效忠的要求,建議指引對此完全沒有清晰交代。
過往選舉顯示,首長級丙級政務官/民政事務專員級別的公務員於選舉前獲委任為選舉主任,便能夠就候選人的思緒及政治取向作出主觀且隨意獨斷的決定,並只需揀選候選人往日曾經發表的文章、言論、宣言、意見表達、社交媒體帖文以及社交媒體專頁發佈關於對候選人的帖文穿鑿附會,當作輔證,而非僅以候選人是否有簽署確認書為單獨基礎作判斷。
去年立法會補選,時任東區民政事務專員鄧如欣獲委任為選舉主任,居然拒絕周庭小姐簽署的確認書,以周庭小姐及其所屬政黨昔日的言論去佐證選舉主任荒唐的理由,去褫奪周庭小姐的參選資格,並且沒有給予周庭小姐公平機會回應選舉主任的無理指控,實在令人憤慨。
由建議指引可見,選舉管理委員會並無引入任何措施或保障,去堵塞上述不合理、不合法、不合憲的漏洞。今後選舉主任依然可以使用此漏洞,依據其個人的政治目的或理念,惡意褫奪任何香港市民的參選資格。
選舉管理委員會於第三章第一部分(3.1)指:「根據法例,候選人的提名是否有效 ,完全是由選舉主任作出決定,選管會無權並一向沒有參與, 亦不會給予任何意見。」此點完全不可接受。當選舉管理委員會對選舉主任按其個人政治取向褫奪候選人參選資格的權力不作任何箝制、監察或審查, 又能如何履行其法定職責,「確保在香港舉行的選舉是以公開、公平和誠實的方式進行」呢?
建議指引並無對選舉主任如何可於短促的提名期內研究並審查任何候選人的政治理念及昔日言論有任何著墨。 建議指引亦未有論及選舉主任會否收到其他機構的秘密意見或者偏頗意見。上述的其他機構,例如律政司、內地及政制事務局、民政事務總署或政府新聞處等,可能預先詳細記錄相關候選人的昔日言論。據悉,上述由第三方準備的詳細記錄可能不合法地導致選舉主任作出褫奪候選人選舉資格的危險決定。
本人必須提醒選舉管理委員會,被選舉權是獲香港基本法及香港人權法案保障的基本權利。聯合國人權事務委員會第25號一般性意見亦指出:「不得以政治見解為由剝奪任何人參加競選的權利。」
本人對建議指引並未就保障候選人不被選舉主任按其個人喜惡褫奪資格,防止選舉主任非法干預選舉採取任何措施深感失望。選舉管理委員會必須詳細檢視自己對上述問題有何解決方法。
就選舉主任褫奪參選資格的合法性,目前透過選舉呈請,並於選舉完結一兩年後由法庭裁決的安排實在強差人意。當中所耗的時間令公義遲來。
本人對建議指引第三章完全反對。本人懇求主席重新並獨立審視第三章所包含的所有程序。在重新審視的時候,懇請閣下撇除並抗拒所有政治考量,尤其是來自行政長官、政制及事務內地局、律政司及其他政府機構企圖干預未來區議會選舉的誠信和公平性的政治考量。
敬祝 鈞安 XXXXXXXX 敬上
2019年7月9日
disturb中文 在 劉倩怡 Facebook 的最佳解答
4月9日星期一晚《恬淡情懷》分享:
The sound of silence Simon & Garfunkel
Hello, darkness my old friend
I've come to talk with you again
Because a vision softly creeping
Left it's seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains within the sound of silence
In restless dream
I walked alone the narrow street of cobble stone
Beneath the halo of a street lamp
I turned my collar to the cold and damp
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night and touched the sound of silence
And in the naked light
I saw ten thousand people may be more
People talking without speaking
People hearing without listening
People writing songs that voices never share
And no one dare disturb the sound of silence
"Fools" said I "you do not know"
"Silence like a cancer grows
Hear my words that I might teach you
Take my arms that I might reach you"
But my words like silent raindrops fell
And echoed in the wells of silence
And the people bowed and prayed to the neon god they made
And the sign flashed out it's warning
In the words that it was forming, and the signs said
"The words of the prophets
Are written on the subway walls and tenement halls
And whispered in the sound of silence"
嗨!黑暗,我的老友
我又來找你聊天了
只因有個幻象緩緩的爬過
趁我熟睡時灑下種籽
這個深植在我腦海裡的幻象
依然留存在沈默之聲裡
在無盡(輾轉)的夢境裡
我一個人走在圓石鋪成的狹窄街道上
在裸燈的光暈下
我豎起衣領抵擋濕冷的天氣
當閃爍的霓虹燈刺痛了雙眼
光芒劃破夜空,也觸動了沈默之聲
在沒有燈罩的燈光下
我看到了數以萬計或者更多的人們
人們聊天而不談心
只用耳朵聽而非用心聆聽
人們寫著毫無感情分享的歌
而且沒有人敢去驚擾沈默之聲
「愚蠢的人們啊!」我說:「你們不明白------」
「沈默像癌細胞一樣蔓延
仔細聽聽我能教你的
握住我伸出的手。」
但我這些話像無聲的雨落下
在沈默的井裡發出回聲------
人們對著自己創造出來的霓虹神像膜拜禱告
告示上閃爍著警句
在逐漸顯現的字句中,它說著:
「先知的箴言,
寫在地下鐵的牆壁和廉價公寓的長廊裡,
並且在沈默之聲中低迴不已---------」
中文翻譯:參考互聯網
照片:劉倩怡