立場新聞 Stand News

字一文不值 但內容無價

2016/11/22 — 11:47

【文、圖:朝雲】

筆者不懂法律,因留心土地正義,偶然去台灣司法院網站,看他們的司法覆核怎處理迫遷。發覺台灣的大法官,直如「言必孔孟」般援引基本法--德國的基本法的「人性尊嚴」。

按德國基本法,當人淪為客體,成為國家的工具或手段,即侵犯人性尊嚴,「若不承認人民有良心自由,個人的主體性將成為國家祭壇上的犧牲品」。

廣告

人性尊嚴是先於國家存在的固有權利,成文憲法不過在確認至高無上的價值。而且尊嚴不可讓渡,即使個人選擇放棄,憲政依然要保護。

***

廣告

湯告魯斯在《華爾基利暗殺行動》(Valkyrie)飾演的史陶芬堡,因曾宣誓效忠第三帝國,在戰後基於不溯既往的法治原則,依然被裁犯法,遺孀不得領取軍人家眷的撫恤。右翼再次侮辱他「叛國」,掀起訴訟。

結果史陶芬堡終獲平反,『納粹政體是一種「不法國家」,遂成為德國法界共識。而德國刑法對於叛國罪的規定,也強調只有背叛「合憲體制」時才構成罪名,因此只有自由民主的法治國,才是必須效忠的國家。』(參考

***

美國亦有類似案例,West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette:

It is also to be noted that the compulsory flag salute and pledge requires affirmation of a belief and an attitude of mind. It is not clear whether the regulation contemplates that pupils forego any contrary convictions of their own and become unwilling converts to the prescribed ceremony, or whether it will be acceptable if they simulate assent by words without belief, and by a gesture barren of meaning. It is now a commonplace that censorship or suppression of expression of opinion is tolerated by our Constitution only when the expression presents a clear and present danger of action of a kind the State is empowered to prevent and punish. It would seem that involuntary affirmation could be commanded only on even more immediate and urgent grounds than silence. But here, the power of compulsion is invoked without any allegation that remaining passive during a flag salute ritual creates a clear and present danger that would justify an effort even to muffle expression. To sustain the compulsory flag salute, we are required to say that a Bill of Rights which guards the individual's right to speak his own mind left it open to public authorities to compel him to utter what is not in his mind.

***

凡此種種,都是看台灣大法官的判辭學回來。效忠專政違背良知,香港的法官有沒有想過這點?筆者不同意「支那」等言詞,但吾人實無法違背良心,效忠專制政權。為何人性尊嚴會被徹底抹殺?不肯違背良心,是否永遠無法行使公權?

在香港的基本法下,德國的基本法難以成為法源。唯望香港終有我們奠立的憲法,衷心希望「人性尊嚴」也能成為我們憲法的第一條。

(張曉明一字一層樓,反觀的筆者的字一毫子都賣不走。但張的確身教我們,何謂「邦無道,富且貴焉」)

 

作者 facebook

發表意見