时论广场》政治手段不利2022台港关系（方恩格 Ross Darrell Feingold）

协助处理陈同佳投案事宜的圣公会教省秘书长管浩鸣表示陈至今未投案是因台未发签证。（美联社）

很多人可能以为台湾与香港政府间的关系恶化始于2019年香港的反送中运动，但早在2014年台港政府之间就已陆续出现芥蒂。让我们来追溯一下台港关系一路下来持续生变的种种迹象。

2014年雨伞运动开始后不久，便有香港民主派人士来台交流、2016年香港政府拒发台湾政治人物的入境签证、同年香港海关扣留了新加坡用来在台湾进行军事训练的装甲车，之后在2019年的反送中运动前后，也有更多香港民主派人士来台寻求支援，在2020年台湾大选时，则有许多在香港被称之为反对派的人士在来台亲近民主、感受台湾选民直接投票的民主气象。

2022年甫开始，台港之间就出现了一些指标，就如同台海关系紧张程度不见趋缓，让我们预见台港关系的前景也不甚乐观。原本往来密切的台港之间，有着许多在港工作的台湾人、在港投资的台商、喜欢到香港旅游的人，以及原本殷殷期盼疫情过后入境游客潮能帮助经济逐渐复苏的台湾本土观光业，他们可能都要失望了。

1月6日，香港《大公报》刊出满版长文点名台湾学者吴叡人涉嫌违反《香港国安法》的六大罪行，其中点明他在《报导者》发表过的〈致一场未完的革命〉一文鼓吹港独、颠覆政权而涉嫌煽动意图罪。港媒这个举动，代表除了台湾政府官员可能被列入他们的黑名单之外，学者、甚至民间人士也都可能成为香港媒体的挞伐目标。在《大公报》报导刊出后一周，吴叡人任职的中研院终于对此事在脸书上做了回应，他们放上了一张中研院大门入口的照片，上面写着「捍卫本院同仁言论自由」，大概是为了保持表面学术中立所以特意低调，如果不仔细点进阅读这张图片底下的标注文字，很难找到中研院发文所捍卫的同仁吴叡人的名字。

针对此事，陆委会与民进党也是迟至一周后才做出回应谴责亲共港媒。笔者认为若台湾政府愿意做出更实际的举措，首先应该帮助台湾人民降低可能受到《香港国安法》侵害的风险，政府应该向台湾人说明其权益以及政府可能采取的相应措施，而不是把此事拿来当作政治化的工具。只发文谴责香港政府或指骂中共，并无法给予台湾人民在《香港国安法》实施之后任何人身安全的保障。事实上，政府可以向人民解释，在正常的法治国家之间，实施引渡法的一个基本前提是，如果提出引渡的罪名在当地法律之下并不构成犯罪要件时，在当地的法院审理引渡请求时，当事者（被告）可以提出反对引渡的抗诉。如果台湾政府能对国人做出这类的解释，可以帮助大家更了解实际情况，进而减少担忧、做出防范。

具百万订阅的台湾YouTube频道「眼球中央电视台」最近制作了一个名为「离港求自由......移民台湾是解答吗？」的影片，指出台湾政府在面对港人来台有许多值得检讨的措施，例如港人申请台湾的投资定居签证，必须历经遥遥无期的漫长等待，这也让许多港人举家搬来台湾之后，面临到在台签证到期而必须迁返回香港的担忧。片中也提到有来台寻求政治庇护的香港人表示，由于他们担忧触及两岸敏感话题，所以台湾政府希望他们避免接受媒体采访，令人不解台湾高倡的民主与言论自由何在。

就商务往来而言，香港法院请求在台清算台湾《苹果日报》相关资产一事，台湾政府以《个资法》限制台湾《苹果日报》对香港传输公司资料，尽管出于政治或资安考量，政府这个作为可能有合理之处，但以商业考量而言，现今有许多在台的跨国公司都在合规的情况下与其他国家（包括香港）的分公司或分部之间共用员工、客户等公司信息资料。现在台湾政府有了新的措施，很可能会造成这些跨国公司在资讯传输上有所顾虑、无所适从。

随着台湾即将于2022年11月举行的地方选举与2024年1月的总统、立委选举，政府对香港公司目前在台湾的商业活动很可能会加紧审查，这也会造成港商对于在台投资抱持更多疑虑，甚至让在香港或中国大陆的台商也可能面临到当地政府基于回应台湾政府举措，带给他们更多商业限制或经营挑战。

此外，在台湾派驻香港的「台北经济文化办事处」拒绝签署港府要求的「一中承诺书」之后，我们也难以预想近期能看到台港各自代表处能够恢复以往那样的正常运作。「台北经济文化办事处」甚至在最近搬迁到了一个更小的办公空间。长远来看，缺乏官方政府或代表机构的两地之间，若要维持正常的贸易往来、人民之间要进行交流、相互理解与对话，想必会面临越来越多的困难。

既然双边合作近期看似无谱，台湾政府应该考虑采取更积极主动的姿态。延宕多年的潘晓颖命案，在今年2月即将届满4年，人在香港并已认罪的凶手陈同佳曾多次透过中间人管浩鸣表示愿意前往台湾自首受审。然而台湾政府却提出在让陈来台前，香港警方必须与将此案在香港所取得的证词与证据交予台湾，并坚持双方政府要商讨陈同佳入境台湾的前提，如让台湾警察飞到香港将他押送来台等条件。

事实上，鉴于台湾警方和检方掌握的证据，台湾在将这些条件作为让陈同佳来台的前提并不合理。陈一旦提出申请来台，台湾政府就应该优先让他入境。台湾检警需要对自己有信心，了解台湾检方足以根据在台已搜证到的法医报告、监视器画面等证据来将犯人定罪。他们提出的担忧─若陈来台受审后，突然坚称自己无罪而不认罪，很明显是一种推诿。台湾政府对于香港政府所提出的这些「法律上」的坚持，很明显只是政治手段，他们在这个议题上坚持走双边对等的路线，看似关乎主权对等与台湾的地位提升，或许有助于他们争取本土选票，但实际上只会让此案一直持续推延未果，更无法给受害者家属交代。

（作者为前美国共和党亚太区主席，Twitter: @RossFeingold）

英文全文：

Taiwan – Hong Kong Relations in 2022

By Ross Darrell Feingold

Former Asia Chairman, Republicans Abroad

Twitter: @RossFeingold

The deterioration in government to government relations between Taiwan and Hong Kong began prior to the protests in 2019 over the proposed extradition law which then became protests to demand direct election to select the Chief Executive and members of the Legislative Council, prior to the implementation of the National Security Law in 2020, or prior to the changes to Hong Kong’s electoral system implemented in 2021. Examples before 2019 include the visits to Taiwan by Hong Kong democracy activists shortly after the 2014 Umbrella Protest, Hong Kong government denying Taiwan legislators entry into Hong Kong in 2016, the seizure in Hong Kong of Singapore military vehicles in transit to Singapore after the Singapore military conducted military exercises in Taiwan in 2016, and visits to Taiwan by Hong Kong democracy activists prior to and during the 2019 protests, as well as to observe Taiwan’s 2020 presidential and legislative elections.

The beginning of 2022 coincides with several incidents that indicate separate from relations between the mainland and Taiwan, the outlook for relations between Taiwan and Hong Kong, is, also, to no one’s surprise, bleak. This should be a concern for the many Taiwan people who work in Hong Kong, Taiwan companies with operations in Hong Kong, Hong Kong companies with operations in Taiwan, and Taiwan’s tourism industry in the hope that post-COVID normal inbound tourism might resume.

On January 6, Hong Kong newspaper Ta Kung Pao, which reflects Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and central government views, published a long article accusing Taiwan scholar Wu Rwei-ren of multiple violations of Hong Kong’s National Security Law. Wu, an associate research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institute of Taiwan History, had previously published a commentary titled “For an Unfinished Revolution” in The Reporter in support of Hong Kong protestors. The Ta Kung Pao article about Wu Rwei-jen indicates that in addition to Taiwan government officials, Taiwan scholars and non-government organization activists are likely to be targeted by Hong Kong media for criticism. The response from Academia Sinica was a Facebook past with a large photo of Academia Sinica’s entrance and the words “defend this institution’s colleagues free speech” (捍卫 本院同仁言论自由) though Wu Rwei-jen’s name is omitted (his name is included in the brief text message that accompanies the photo). Responses from the Mainland Affairs Council and Democratic Progressive Party both occurred three days later, an unusually long delay. More practically, the Taiwan government should avoid politicizing the risk that Wu or others face of detention and extradition to Hong Kong when travelling in third countries, as a basic premise of extradition is that it is objectionable if the charge would not be a crime in the location from which the extradition is requested.

A recent report on Taiwan’s EYECTV further illustrated the Taiwan government’s somewhat sclerotic approach to Hong Kong issues, as it noted the lengthy delays Hong Kong people seeking Taiwan investor visas now face in obtaining approval to move to Taiwan, and, the Taiwan government has discouraged Hong Kong political activists who have relocated to Taiwan from speaking publicly.

For the business world, the Taiwan government’s intervention to prevent the transfer of data necessary for Next Digital’s liquidators in Hong Kong to perform their duties, although perhaps justifiable for political or data security reasons, is a concern to all multinational companies that up to now have complied with Taiwan law when sharing employee, customer and other information among offices in Asia including in Hong Kong. With local elections in November 2022 and presidential and Legislative Yuan elections in January 2024, it is likely that government, politicians, and non-government organization scrutiny of Hong Kong companies current business activities in Taiwan will increase, including the proposed purchase of Taiwan Apple Daily by a Hong Kong based investor. New investments in Taiwan by Hong Kong companies will be even more unlikely. Retaliation against Taiwan companies in Hong Kong or in the mainland is likely.

In addition, at the moment there is no reason to believe that Hong Kong and Taiwan’s respective representative offices will resume normal operations any time soon. In Hong Kong, Taiwan recently shrunk its office space by relocating the remaining local hire staff to a consolidated location from the multiple locations that were previously maintained. Over the long term, the lack of government representatives in each location is detrimental to trade and people flow and mutual understanding.

Amid the bleak outlook for Taiwan – Hong Kong relations, there is a unilateral action that Taiwan can take. February will be the four year anniversary of Poon Hiu-wing’s murder in Taipei, and her admitted murderer Chan Tong-kai has repeatedly, through family spokesman Reverend Peter Koon who took office on January 1 as member of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council, expressed a willingness to fly to Taiwan to surrender to authorities and be put on trial. The Taiwan police and prosecutors should be confident in the forensic, video, and other evidence that is already in their possession that a conviction is likely, and thus the Taiwan government should eagerly accept Chan’s offer to come to Taiwan. If, after Chan comes to Taiwan and goes on trial, he suddenly insists on his innocence rather than admit his guilt, prosecutors should still be able to obtain a guilty verdict on the basis of the evidence they possess, with or without Chan Tong-kai’s cooperation.

The Taiwan government, has, in the past, requested that prior to agreeing that Chan Tong-kai may come to Taiwan, Hong Kong police share with the Taiwan evidence obtained in Hong Kong from Chan Tong-kai, that the two governments must directly discuss the terms of Chan Tong-kai’s travel to Taiwan, and that Taiwan police fly to Hong Kong so that they can accompany Chan Tong-kai on the flight back to Taiwan. Given the evidence that Taiwan police and prosecutors have in their possession, these conditions are all unnecessary, and Taiwan should instead clearly state that a visa for Chan to travel to Taiwan will be issued immediately upon his application with no other conditions. Further delay only denies justice to Poon’s family. This is one decision that the Taiwan government can unilaterally make in order to take the high road in bilateral relations.