2018年7月10日
無論defies the government還是defies the law,俱是政治不正確的defiance。Defiance跟riot一般政治,那是史上常識,委實不必細表,然而,法院一向追慕司法獨立,於政治不是素來敬而遠之嗎?那Gersdorf既一心defiant,卻在波蘭最高法院門前宣示「I'm not engaging in politics」,豈非黑白不分明?是又不然!
今夏LSE(跟那律師會自家製的入行試風馬牛!)公法教授Martin Loughlin寫了卷新書Political Jurisprudence,卷首聰明區分politics與political之歧義,原文稍長,惟勝義精微,恕難撮寫,遑論譯述:
「The political should not be confused with politics. Politics is a set of practices that has evolved to manage conflicts that arise between individuals or groups. The political, by contrast, refer to a decisive and more basic phenomenon, that the primary form of political unit-the state-is embedded in structures of authority and obedience whose power is such that they shape their members' sense of justice and injustice, right and wrong, freedom and servitude, good and evil.」
沿此路進,politics指的是憑藉制度上的權力來理順紛爭,重行分配利益和權位,波蘭政府及其議會正是如此如斯,藉推行法官退休新法重行安排誰和誰可以留在最高法院任上;而political指的則是在現存憲制和國家權力下,我們如何尋求是非對錯,為善行義。Gersdorf力持波蘭憲法保障首席法官一任五年(伊的任期至2020年),以及European Convention of Human Rights確立的司法獨立,擇善固執,直斥新法unconstitutional,故伊人選擇不為所動,整妝上班,既judicious,亦political。
訂戶登入