港商申请游行遭警告：公安叫我们不要搞事
苹果日报记者陈沛敏／京奥期间，北京划定三个公园为示威区。北京市公安局昨公佈，共接获77宗游行、集会、示威申请，但基于各种理由，没批出任何一宗。五名港商昨午抵达北京，申请本周四至周六游行，但当局要求他们改为申请周日奥运闭幕礼之后的日子。一名意大利记者申请下周二示威，要求释放动物园的大熊猫，当局答应后天回覆是否批核。
五名「港商（内地）投资权益关注组」成员，昨由香港经深圳乘坐飞机，中午抵达北京，自机场开始已有便衣人员沿途监视。他们前往北京公安局出入境管理处，提出示威申请，但「连申请表都冇张，就咁叫我张白纸写申请书。」他们申请于本周四至周六，分别到三个示威区游行，并注明不用音响器材，不打横幅，手持「」字，和平进行。
他们在申请书上表明，奥运期间示威，目的是「给中央领导知道港商在内地投资受到极大迫害，要求中央领导出手解决」，并写上参加示威11人的名字。双方交涉至近下午6时，其间关注组成员一度步出公安局，在门外向传媒展示写「港商申」的示威牌，大批便衣人员出动长短火相机镜头及摄录机记录，并拍下在场每名记者及示威者。
关注组发言人王文金会后表示，双方面谈了3个多小时，仍无结果。他引述公安局称，不会批准他们周四至周六示威，建议他们改为申请下周二或下周三，并警告他们若不接受，就不要搞事，否则即属违法。王文金认为，下周奥运会已闭幕，不符合奥运期间请愿的目的，批评当局「做骚」，声言「继续抗争」。五名代表昨晚入住酒店，表示要商讨下一步行动。
过去多次上访北京并曾到中南海静坐的关注组，早在本月5日京奥开幕前，已由65岁的王文金隻身赴京，提出申请。当时他引述当局表示，其组织在内地是未经注册的非法组织，不批准示威。关注组的成员各有申诉理由，如王文金声称曾出资二亿元，在山西与县政府干部合资经营铜矿，但被对方侵吞款项。
意记者促释放熊猫
自称是意大利报章《il Giornale》记者的Luciano Gulli昨午也到公安局提出示威申请。身上挂有奥运场内注册记者证的他说，上周四已来过一次，当时公安局指他资料不全，昨日再来，公安局终于发出公文，承诺后天会发出审批决定书，决定是否批准他下周二到紫竹园示威。Gulli不满意公安局处理申请的程序，批评对方「太官僚」。对于中国是否享有表达自由，他没正面回答，只表示要求释放动物园的大熊猫，牠们是中国的象徵。
篮球馆疯狂製造逾百吨垃圾
北京奥运由8月9日正式开赛至今，因各场馆人气急升，製造的垃圾也暴增，其中五棵松篮球馆更成为製造垃圾的大户，截至前日，已製造101.5吨垃圾，不可以回收的佔51.8吨，可以回收的有49.7吨。
由于实在太多垃圾，30多名工人要将一辆垃圾车内的垃圾分类，也要一个半小时。北京《法制晚报》
基督团体入境圣经被没收
一个美国基督团体日前入境中国时，300多本圣经被中国当局没收。领队昨日表示，除非拿回圣经，否则不会离开机场。据克雷恩表示，海关从他们的託运行李中收走圣经后，他与三名「超国界愿景」（Vision Beyond Borders）成员昨晚都留在位于中国西南的昆明机场，将抗争到底。据悉，上述圣经均以中文印製。
Op-Ed Columnist
Malcontents Need Not Apply
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: August 16, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/opinion/17kristof.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
BEIJINGTo put a smiley face on its image during the Olympics, the Chinese government set aside three “protest zones” in Beijing. Officials explained that so long as protesters obtained approval in advance, demonstrations would be allowed.
So I decided to test the system.
Following government instructions, I showed up at an office of the Beijing Public Security Bureau, found Window 12 and declared to the officer, “I’m here to apply to hold a protest.”
What I didn’t realize is that Public Security has arrested at least a half-dozen people who have shown up to apply for protest permits. Public Security is pretty shrewd. In the old days it had to go out and catch protesters in the act. Now it saves itself the bother: would-be protesters show up at Public Security offices to apply for permits and are promptly detained. That’s cost-effective law enforcement for you.
Fortunately, the official at Window 12 didn’t peg me as a counterrevolutionary. He looked at me worriedly and asked for my passport and other ID papers. Discovering that I was a journalist, he asked hopefully, “Wouldn’t you rather conduct an interview about demonstrations?”
“No. I want to apply to hold one.”
His brow furrowed. “What do you want to protest?”
“I want to demonstrate in favor of preserving Beijing’s historic architecture.” It was the least controversial, most insipid topic I could concoct.
“Do you think the government is not doing a good job at this?” he asked sternly.
“There may be room for improvement,” I said delicately.
The official frowned and summoned two senior colleagues who, after a series of frantic phone calls, led me into the heart of the police building. I was accompanied by a Times videographer, and he and a police videographer busily videoed each other. Then the police explained that under the rules they could video us but we couldn’t video them.
The Public Security Bureau (a fancy name for a police station) gleams like much of the rest of Beijing. It is a lovely, spacious building, and the waiting room we were taken to was beautifully furnished; no folding metal chairs here. It’s a fine metaphor for China’s legal system: The hardware is impeccable, but the software is primitive.
After an hour of waiting, interrupted by periodic frowning examinations of our press credentials, we were ushered into an elegant conference room. I was solemnly directed to a chair marked “applicant.”
Three police officers sat across from me, and the police videographer continued to film us from every angle. The officers were all cordial and professional, although one seemed to be daydreaming about pulling out my fingernails.
Then they spent nearly an hour going over the myriad rules for demonstrations. These were detailed and complex, and, most daunting, I would have to submit a list of every single person attending my demonstration. The list had to include names and identity document numbers.
In addition, any Chinese on a name list would have to go first to the Public Security Bureau in person to be interviewed (arrested?).
“If I go through all this, then will my application at least be granted?” I asked.
“How can we tell?” a policeman responded. “That would prejudge the process.”
“Well, has any application ever been granted?” I asked.
“We can’t answer that, for that matter has no connection to this case.”
The policemen did say that if they approved, they would give me a “Demonstration Permission Document.” Without that, my demonstration would be illegal.
I surrendered. The rules were so monstrously bureaucratic that I couldn’t even apply for a demonstration. My Olympic dreams were dashed. The police asked me to sign their note-taker’s account of the meeting, and we politely said our goodbyes.
Yet even though the process is a charade, it still represents progress in China, in that the law implicitly acknowledges the legitimacy of protest. Moreover, a trickle of Chinese have applied to hold protests, even though they know that they are more likely to end up in jail than in a “protest zone.” Fear of the government is ebbing.
My hunch is that in the coming months, perhaps after the Olympics, we will see some approvals granted. China is changing: it is no democracy, but it’s also no longer a totalitarian state.
China today reminds me of Taiwan in the mid-1980s as a rising middle class demanded more freedom. Almost every country around China, from Mongolia to Indonesia, Thailand to South Korea, has become more open and less repressive — not because of the government’s kindness but because of the people’s insistence.
I feel that same process happening here, albeit agonizingly slowly. Someday China’s software will catch up with its hardware.
I invite you to comment on this column on my blog, www.nytimes.com/ontheground, and join me on Facebook at www.facebook.com/kristof.
德国之声
2008奥运 2008.08.18
游行专区见景不见人—国际奥委会要求解释
中国宪法规定公民有和平示威的权利，奥运期间，中国官方也网开一面，将北京的三个公园辟为“游行”专区。然而，只听楼板响，不见人下来。公园里只有普通游客的身影。人权组织对游行申请者的命运表示担忧。目前，国际奥委会要求中国方面尽快公布集会游行示威的申请及审核情况，很快，他们得到了一个冠冕堂皇的答复。
据德国《明镜周刊》网络版援引人权组织报道，多名申请在北京三个游行专区举行示威活动的人士遭到拘捕。对此，国际奥委会要求北京当局做出解释。国际奥委会发言人戴维斯周一在出席记者招待会的时候首先盛赞北京奥运会的顺利召开及完美运作。相比之下，言论自由却不见改善。戴维斯表示，已经敦促有关方面澄清"示威申请者"的情况，希望"尽可能多地做到信息透明化"。
外国记者普遍关心，究竟有多少人申请在奥运期间和平游行？又有多少申请得以批复？应国际奥委会要求，中国方面很快公布了相关数字。据中国官方媒体新华社周一报道，今年8月份以来，北京市有关部门共接待申请集会游行示威77起149人次，其中74起申请已"自行撤回"。
新华社引用北京市公安局负责人的话称，8月份以来的77起集会游行示威申请中，境内人员提出申请74起146人次，境外人员提出申请3起3人次。大多数的申请是要求解决劳资纠纷、医患纠纷、福利待遇等具体问题，目前，"有74起游行示威活动的申请人通过有关主管机关或单位与他们的协商，解决了具体问题"，因而"自行撤回了申请"。此外，属于申请手续不全、不符合申请要求的有2起，现正在补办相关手续。属于《中华人民共和国集会游行示威法》规定的不予许可的情形还有1起，主管机关已做出不予许可的决定。
至于这些申请真的是自行撤回？还是另有隐衷？一名知情人告诉德新社记者，有关部门要求她在申请"正式被拒"之前最好"自己收回"。
在周一的记者招待会上，戴维斯还表示，国际奥委会希望知道，为什么一名来自东躲的美国记者不被允许入境，尽管他已正式注册。"至今我们没有得到任何答复。"戴维斯说。此外，一些不受欢迎的网站依然处于封锁状态--尽管国际奥委会多次敦促官方打开。
不过，戴维斯同时强调，中国人在组织方面的成果无人能及。以至于他们与北京奥组委之间的每日例行会议都不必进行--因为一切都过于完美。"这令国际奥委会感到无比地轻松、惬意。"不过，奥运组织者依然能够感到外界的不满。北京奥组委执行副主席王伟认为这都是外国记者的错，"他们根本都不了解中国。" 王伟表示，奥运会将促进中国的改革开放。"每一个人都将看到，奥运会是一个很好的平台。"他说，"中国人都对未来充满信心。"为了避免不必要的争端，中方将在奥运会的第二周减少与国际奥委会共同召开国际记者招待会。"因为大多数的提问都与比赛无关"。
责任编辑：德国之声中文网
沒有留言:
張貼留言