支持及訂閱請按 Like

星期日, 1月 06, 2008

中大打蛇案

男女共宿中大生罰停學一年
月前收到有居住逸夫書院二宿突擊「打蛇」,宿舍職員在同學睡覺時衝門而入,有同學向學生會投訴指感到被侵犯私隱,但當時職員聲稱旨在檢查房內傢俬有否移位,若學生被發現曾搬動傢俬,宿舍方面會向有關學生發出警告信,若有損毀更需賠款。

對於「中大打蛇案」,林忌比較關心的,是侵犯學生權利的問題。

確立居所權利的英國著名案例,就是 Entick v Carrington 1765 此案例;在這個案例當中,Lord Camden 發表了著名的「私有產權宣言」,確立除了有法官批準的搜查令以外,任何人沒有權進入他人住所搜查的案例。

"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property. That right is preserved sacred and incommunicable in all instances, where it has not been taken away or abridged by some public law for the good of the whole. The cases where this right of property is set aside by private law, are various. Distresses, executions, forfeitures, taxes etc are all of this description; wherein every man by common consent gives up that right, for the sake of justice and the general good. By the laws of England, every invasion of private property, be it ever so minute, is a trespass. No man can set his foot upon my ground without my license, but he is liable to an action, though the damage be nothing; which is proved by every declaration in trespass, where the defendant is called upon to answer for bruising the grass and even treading upon the soil. If he admits the fact, he is bound to show by way of justification, that some positive law has empowered or excused him. The justification is submitted to the judges, who are to look into the books; and if such a justification can be maintained by the text of the statute law, or by the principles of common law. If no excuse can be found or produced, the silence of the books is an authority against the defendant, and the plaintiff must have judgment.

So the individual may do anything but that which is forbidden by law, and the state may do nothing but that which is expressly authorised by law."

即使是學校提供的宿舍,作為提供學生住宿的居所,其背後擁有的權利精神,亦應作如是觀;現實或有很多困難,那些「檢查傢俬」的藉口,卻完全站不住腳!這亦是為何我們反對葉劉廿三條的原因--其背後的意義,就是我們不能接受沒有法庭的搜查令的突擊搜查。

然而,事件中的主角,如報導屬實的話,則所犯的錯誤則不止男女共宿:
男生因屢次違反宿舍規則,多次在女生宿舍「屈蛇」,又被投訴滋擾其他同學,屢勸不改,終被委員會判罰由今年 9 月起停學一年。據悉,該男生不滿校方的決定曾作上訴,惟校方最終仍維持原判。

據悉,該男生長居於其女友位於聯合書院x宿x樓一單位, 女友的同房對他長期居於房間感極度不滿 ,雖曾多次投訴,惟情況仍無改善,該男生也曾三度被校方「捉到」於女生宿舍出現,校方最終作出停學決定。

問題就是,男方在未經過該女生的同房同意,長期屈蛇而令對方「極度不滿」,這就是最大的問題所在。

男女應否共宿,這是道德的問題;但侵犯了同房的權利,不是間中一次半次,而是長期的侵犯,更多次投訴仍不肯改善,更三次被捉到,問題就非常嚴重了。

當然,判停學一年是否太重,這點值得討論;但本質上,該男生最大的錯,就是長期侵犯他人的權利;對一個女生說,要你長期和一個陌生男性同居,會有何感想?即使是男性,也未必能忍受一個長期無故同房的陌生人吧?

去到這麼遲才判罰,去到這麼遲才採取行動,是否太遲?早一些嚴,好過去到今日三輸的田地,最令人感到無奈的,或者是這點。
這個小工具發生錯誤

熱門文章

這個小工具發生錯誤

最新文章

  • 當左膠變成熱狗 - 驚見「左膠御用」傳媒獨立媒體《當蔡子強變成林忌》一文,左膠不但沒有從脫離群眾,被大量原本的支持者離棄,以至被原本的同路人所質疑,以至高呼要票債票償吸取任何教訓,更反過來四圍挑起火頭,繼續人身攻擊,特別是這位當年亂寫「歧視」等法律,當年不斷亂屈「歧視法西斯」的左膠作者「稻草」。 當左膠連溫文保守如蔡子強,也要點名...
    7 個月前

最近文章

再次伸延閱讀