無恥之國


To suspend Yang Yu Jen’s hunger strike for Lo-Sheng, over 100 policemen were sent to the residence of Taiwan’s premier of the Executive Yuan to deliver curfew once again in Taiwan. They kept monitoring Yang since March 8th and kept him from any interview.


為了打壓絕食抗議的台大城鄉所博士楊友仁,警方不惜耗費大量警力「戒嚴」,自8日起守候在行政院長蘇貞昌官邸門口,過路民眾看見這番陣仗,皆直呼:「這麼多警察,真可怕,是要怎麼走過去!」

Not only oppressing Yang, the police also used hooliganism to prohibit medium from interviewing him. While he sat in front of the 7-11 near the residence, more than 3 policemen lunged toward him and dragged him away. “We are just persuading him to leave!” policemen said. I discontent with the brusqueness, so I asked the policeman, ”Did Yang commit crime? ” The police answered arrogantly,” He violated the Law of Maintaining Public Order, and the Law of Interfering with Peace and Order! He is wandering all night on the street, breaking the peace of the neighborhood!”


警察不僅打壓楊友仁個人,甚至以「公權力」阻擋媒體記者採訪,當楊友仁因站立太久,坐在7-11門口,警方就出動3、4名警察強行拉走楊友仁,並口口聲 聲「我們只是勸離」。我不滿警方打擾,向警方詢問「楊友仁犯了什麼罪」,警方卻以傲慢口氣回應:「他犯了社會秩序維護法!有家不回,在外遊蕩!干擾鄰居安 寧!」

“Yang only carried a fact sheet to chat with me,” I kept asking them,” What law did he against? If you see this behavior as a vagrant, do you usually send a hundred policemen to deal with one vagrant? If he is, then it’s the duty of Department of Social Welfare.” When I ask them, they sent more to surround us and answered loudly, “The police station is executing its duty. I simply won’t let you talk in front of the store!”


我進一步追問,社會秩序維護法的規範為「深夜遊蕩」,楊友仁並沒有帶任何叫囂工具,僅手持一本計畫書與我說話,究竟違反什麼律法?「遊民應該請社會局處 理,你們一般處理遊民會出動百名警力嗎?在我請教警察之際,警方不但超過3名警力團團圍住我與楊友仁,並大聲回應:「我是派出所所長,在執行公務,我就 是不准你們在7-11門口講話!





The most unbelievable thing was that the police even used DV to record me and Yang for collecting evidence! I tried to cover the DV and made representations, but the police ignored and shouted at me.


警方粗暴妨礙新聞自由之餘,竟拿起蒐證用的DV對著正在採訪的我與楊友仁拍攝,我質疑並伸手阻擋警方拍攝時,警方卻以「我沒有在拍妳」回應,完全忽視我的抗議,甚至撂下一句:「有辦法用行政程序法告我啊!


Then we went to another public space beside 7-11, trying to negotiate with a police officer who seems to have a better attitude, other policemen kept surrounding me. I told them that I have the rights to speak at any place I want, “Besides, it is kind of scary to have a dozen of bodyguard standing around, Mister Officer!” Even I strongly expressed that I am not a crime suspect, they just answered, “We are not surrounding you. Since you have the rights to stand here, so do we!”


當我與楊友仁和一位口氣較好的警方溝通後,移至7-11旁的一家店外的「公共空間」繼續訪問,警方竟然「鍥而不捨」繼續包圍我!我表達:就算身為一位公 民,也有在任何地方說話的權利,「而且警察『大人』、『人民保母』,你們7、8個警察圍著我一個女生,我覺得很恐怖吶!」當我強烈表達「自己不是犯人」與 伸張權利的同時,警方竟回答:「我們哪有包圍妳,既然妳有權利站在這,我們當然也有權利!」

Yang smiled helplessly and said to me, "This is how they treated me." I couldn’t believe it happened in my country, Taiwan, which claimed itself as a country of democracy but discouraging free speech and the rights of medium like this! It is a shame on both police and the government to play with words on their duty, claiming they treat Yang as a vagrant but pressure him as crime suspect.


楊友仁無奈地笑說:「他們就是這樣對待我。」教人訝異號稱民主的台灣,竟以此種方式打壓一位人民表達意見的行為、一個媒體工作者爬梳真相的權力!警方的無 恥,正是政府的無恥!玩弄語言歧義、遊走身份模糊地帶:對外宣稱「以對待遊民方式對待楊友仁」,實則以「對待犯人」的方式進行壓迫。


Who authorize the police such a big power? Is it meaningful to keep our Premier’s goal of public security by mobilizing over 100 armed policemen to deal with a barehanded hunger striker?


是誰給予警方如此大的權力遊走法律邊緣?行政院長蘇貞昌大喊「拚治安」的方式,原來是放任警方玩弄職權、模稜兩可!而對待一個手無寸鐵的絕食「陳情」民 眾,竟出動超過百名手持盾牌的警力,再聲稱「不是警方」擾民,簡直就是顛倒邏輯:如果蘇貞昌願意出面解釋,需要浪費這麼多社會資源嗎?


” If I came with a group more than three, I will be arrested on against parade law.” The police dragged Yang off to the squad car right after he ended the hunger strike, made him unable to come off a press conference against the police.


荒謬至極的是,楊友仁連開記者會的權利都沒有。他無奈地說:「新聞通知發下午1點到5點,就是因為只要太多人圍著我,警方就會以『違反集會遊行法』把我抓 走。」恰在楊友仁說完這句話後,警方便一把將他扭進警車,揚長而去。這樣的警察素質,莫怪中研院民族所副研究員丘延亮感嘆:警察需要改造!


Yang’s action was not only in proposed for Lo-Sheng, but also exposed the lie of administrant, and the fact that our government is oppressing people. People who is fed by the limited electronic media, no matter you support Lo-Sheng or not , should condemn the government’s violence! Citizens should have the rights to speak freely.We can’t keep silent!


楊友仁的行動,不僅在為樂生倡議,更是揭發官員的公然說謊、壓迫人民的事實。被有限電子媒體餵養的民眾,不論你們是否支持樂生,都應正視政府以「模糊定義」的方式進行威權統治,公民應該有自由發言的權利,不容噤聲!

感謝編譯先生鼎力相助(Translator, Tang Chen Wei

9 則留言:

Cobain 提到...

對照最近這幾天發生的社會案件
如果
我們的"大人"們也能有如此執行公權力的決心就好了

匿名 提到...

您罵錯人了,
鷹犬是該罵沒錯,
但是您應該把精力和焦點對付鷹犬後面的主子。

Gaea 提到...

敬匿名者:

歡迎您來此發言,但我希望知道與我溝通的是誰,就算一個符號也好。

我不認為自己罵錯人。誠如您所說,背後的結構該罵。但不可忽略的是,這些警察模糊了自己的角色;從另一個角度視之,與我進行衝突的是這些被授予權力的,沒有實質的行為,易被解讀為謾罵臆測,畢竟,尚有許多人深深相信:「找蘇貞昌?你們找錯人了!」

況且,「警方的無恥,正是政府的無恥!」

匿名 提到...

什麼樣的選民,選出什麼樣的政府
什麼樣的政府,造就什麼樣的警察

Gaea 提到...

樓上這位是同一個匿名者嗎
這樣我很難分吶

宇清 提到...

不知道能將這篇文章
以電子郵件轉寄給旅居海外的朋友嗎
我會邀請他們轉寄給更多外國朋友
另外會將文章印出成為資料夾
隨時跟朋友討論樂生保存議題
打聲招呼
大家一起努力
感謝了

竹風 提到...

想將文章轉寄給國外朋友
另外將文章印出成為資料夾
隨時跟朋友提樂生問題
不知道方便與否
打聲招呼
大家一起努力了

zubine 提到...

警察知法犯法...政府致幕後主使者...如果是這樣的話...那我們的司法機關可否起訴警察? ...如果我們有足夠的證據指出這群警察妨礙人權的話? 說不定,下次警察接到上級命令,準備要去堵人的時候會想一下?想說我要違反上級的命令呢?還是要違反人權而被告.(前提是,要有警察堵人的證據吧.)
如果司法機關沒有能力,而只是聽從上級的命令的話,那我們可以說我們距離民主國家的level還有段距離!
我是不懂法律拉,但是聽起來,這整件事情是被警察吃案了. 警察先生一邊違反人權,一邊擋住媒體不讓記者拍攝...這樣看起來就有點羅生門了...有圖片可以證明你的說法嗎?不要讓人覺得你是在說故事.

Gaea 提到...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63Ia-xTMgII&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ewretch%2Ecc%2Fblog%2FBbrother

中天錄下的