1. 過去多年來的反覆勸告，泛民及反對派，只是當耳邊風。他們不斷以各種極端手法去挑戰北京的底線，他們終於爭取到「特區適用的國安法立法」。
2. 過去一年達到無法無天的地步，令到整個城市難以正常運作，一般市民生活於惶恐之中。若非政府以極大耐力去勉強支撐住，相信香港早已步入無政府狀態。很多有心人士提出各種規勸，但不得要領，以下是其中之一。
3. Thin
blue line between law and anarchy
City talk | Cheng Huan 8 Jul 2019
There is hardly any doubt that the vast
majority of our community gives unreserved support to our police force.
In recent weeks, without the loyal hard
work and tremendous sacrifice of the police to maintain law and order Hong Kong
could have descended into chaos and anarchy.
It is worth reminding
ourselves what would happen if such an unhappy occurrence as anarchy were to
befall Hong Kong.
It is spelt out very
clearly, and ominously, in the Basic Law.
If Hongkong becomes
anarchic its autonomy ceases.
The actual words are in article
18 of the Basic Law, which states unequivocally that if there is
"turmoil" that "endangers national unity or security and is
beyond the control" of Hong Kong, then the National People's Congress can
declare a state of emergency and apply the "relevant national laws"
in Hong Kong.
Turmoil in Hong Kong gives the
mainland the right to enforce its laws - and, of course, the abrogation of the
one country two systems principle.
It's one more reason why
the tumult within the Legislative Council augurs badly for the well-being of
Hong Kong.
The quiet majority must be
aghast at the harm the black protesters have done.
A ruthless, highly
determined faction, arranged by social media apps, brought Hong Kong to the
edge of the cliff that marks the boundary between law and anarchy.
Smashing up Legco is
the behavior of anarchists, not the acceptable behavior of demonstrators seeking
change.
Some politicians and
well-educated people even had the effrontery to suggest the police were setting
a trap to discredit the protestors when they allowed them to enter Legco.
I believe such ideas
are nonsense.
There are over 30,000 officers who do a
brilliant job safeguarding nearly eight million Hongkongers.
The force enjoys the trust and admiration
of the overwhelming majority population.
In the past, when there have been rare
lapses in the high standards expected of the police, there have been
investigations and they are why the Independent Police Complaints Council was
set up in 2009.
Any complaint about police behavior is
investigated by the Complaints Against Police Office, which in turn has a
statutory duty to report to the 30-member IPCC.
The IPCC is appointed from a wide spectrum
of society, including lawyers, doctors and businessmen, and boasts of drawing
upon the "diverse expertise" of the community.
The IPCC provides a counter-balance to CAPO
and enjoys extensive powers further to investigate any complaint. It can come
to a divergent view and does not have to agree with CAPO.
Beyond both CAPO and the IPCC, the chief
executive has the ultimate power.
Some people are skeptical of the present
arrangements regarding the dual roles of CAPO and IPCC, saying the two bodies
are weak, ineffective and timid. They are said to take too long to make
decisions.
But the strength of the arrangements is
that it tries to strike a balance between public trust in the police and the
maintenance of social order.
In these perilous times, when the police
have been subjected to vitriolic abuse it is more important than ever that
society must support the police unequivocally.
Because a segment of
the protesters apparently despise the police, it is essential that society does
not pander to the demands of the protesters.
To do so will besmirch
the reputation of the police, further weakening their self-esteem and morale.
Cheng Huan is an author and a senior
counsel who practices in Hong Kong
（中文翻譯，附於送來的短訊中，部份未必翻譯到原意，但為了尊重原譯者，故不作改動）
法律和無政府狀態之間的細藍線
毫無疑問，我們絕大多數社會都毫無保留地支持我們的警察部隊。
最近幾周，如果沒有忠誠的辛勤工作和警方維持治安的巨大犧牲，香港可能會陷入混亂和無政府狀態。
值得提醒的是，如果這種不幸的無政府狀態將會降臨香港會發生什麼。
它在“基本法”中非常清楚，不祥地闡明。
如果香港變得無政府主義，其自治權就會停止。
“基本法”第十八條的實際用語明確指出，如果“危害國家統一或安全並且無法控制”的“混亂”，那麼全國人民代表大會就可以宣佈進入緊急狀態。並在香港適用“有關國家法律”。
香港的動盪使大陸有權執行其法律 - 當然還有廢除一國兩制的原則。
這也是立法會內部動盪對香港福祉造成嚴重影響的另一個原因。
沉默的大多數人必須對黑人抗議者所造成的傷害感到震驚。
由社交媒體應用程序安排的一個無情的，高度堅定的派系，將香港帶到懸崖的邊緣，標誌着法律和無政府狀態之間的界限。
粉碎立法會是無政府主義者的行爲，而不是示威者尋求改變的可接受行爲。
一些政治家和受過良好教育的人甚至還有一種諷刺的態度，即當警察允許他們進入立法會時，警方正設置陷阱來詆譭抗議者。
我相信這些想法是無稽之談。
有超過30,000名官員爲保護近800萬香港人做了出色的工作。
該部隊深受絕大多數人的信任和欽佩。
過去，當警方的高標準出現罕見的失誤時，就會進行調查，這就是爲什麼投訴警察獨立監察委員會於2009年成立的原因。
任何有關警方行爲的投訴均由投訴警察辦公室進行調查，而投訴警察辦公室則有法定義務向30名警監會報告。
IPCC由社會各界人士任命，包括律師，醫生和商人，並自誇利用社區的“多元化專業知識”。
警監會爲投訴警察課提供反平衡，並享有進一步調查任何投訴的廣泛權力。它可以達成不同的觀點，而不必與投訴警察課達成協議。
除了CAPO和IPCC之外，行政長官還擁有最終的權力。
有些人對目前有關投訴警察課和警監會雙重角色的安排持懷疑態度，他說兩個機構都是弱者，無效和膽怯。據說它們需要很長時間才能做出決定。
但這些安排的力量在於它試圖在公衆對警察的信任和維持社會秩序之間取得平衡。
在這些危險的時期，當警察遭受過刻薄的虐待時，社會必須比以往任何時候都更加重要，必須明確支持警察。
因爲一部分抗議者顯然鄙視警察，所以社會不應該迎合抗議者的要求。
這樣做會損害警方的聲譽，進一步削弱他們的自尊心和士氣。
清洪 是在香港執業的作家和資深律師.
4. 故泛民及激進反對派應切實檢討自己的行為，盡量／盡快改過。
Regards,
George Luk
