時論廣場》政治手段不利2022臺港關係（方恩格 Ross Darrell Feingold）

協助處理陳同佳投案事宜的聖公會教省秘書長管浩鳴表示陳至今未投案是因臺未發籤證。（美聯社）

很多人可能以爲臺灣與香港政府間的關係惡化始於2019年香港的反送中運動，但早在2014年臺港政府之間就已陸續出現芥蒂。讓我們來追溯一下臺港關係一路下來持續生變的種種跡象。

2014年雨傘運動開始後不久，便有香港民主派人士來臺交流、2016年香港政府拒發臺灣政治人物的入境簽證、同年香港海關扣留了新加坡用來在臺灣進行軍事訓練的裝甲車，之後在2019年的反送中運動前後，也有更多香港民主派人士來臺尋求支援，在2020年臺灣大選時，則有許多在香港被稱之爲反對派的人士在來臺親近民主、感受臺灣選民直接投票的民主氣象。

2022年甫開始，臺港之間就出現了一些指標，就如同臺海關係緊張程度不見趨緩，讓我們預見臺港關係的前景也不甚樂觀。原本往來密切的臺港之間，有着許多在港工作的臺灣人、在港投資的臺商、喜歡到香港旅遊的人，以及原本殷殷期盼疫情過後入境遊客潮能幫助經濟逐漸復甦的臺灣本土觀光業，他們可能都要失望了。

1月6日，香港《大公報》刊出滿版長文點名臺灣學者吳叡人涉嫌違反《香港國安法》的六大罪行，其中點明他在《報導者》發表過的〈致一場未完的革命〉一文鼓吹港獨、顛覆政權而涉嫌煽動意圖罪。港媒這個舉動，代表除了臺灣政府官員可能被列入他們的黑名單之外，學者、甚至民間人士也都可能成爲香港媒體的撻伐目標。在《大公報》報導刊出後一週，吳叡人任職的中研院終於對此事在臉書上做了迴應，他們放上了一張中研院大門入口的照片，上面寫着「捍衛本院同仁言論自由」，大概是爲了保持表面學術中立所以特意低調，如果不仔細點進閱讀這張圖片底下的標註文字，很難找到中研院發文所捍衛的同仁吳叡人的名字。

針對此事，陸委會與民進黨也是遲至一週後才做出迴應譴責親共港媒。筆者認爲若臺灣政府願意做出更實際的舉措，首先應該幫助臺灣人民降低可能受到《香港國安法》侵害的風險，政府應該向臺灣人說明其權益以及政府可能採取的相應措施，而不是把此事拿來當作政治化的工具。只發文譴責香港政府或指罵中共，並無法給予臺灣人民在《香港國安法》實施之後任何人身安全的保障。事實上，政府可以向人民解釋，在正常的法治國家之間，實施引渡法的一個基本前提是，如果提出引渡的罪名在當地法律之下並不構成犯罪要件時，在當地的法院審理引渡請求時，當事者（被告）可以提出反對引渡的抗訴。如果臺灣政府能對國人做出這類的解釋，可以幫助大家更瞭解實際情況，進而減少擔憂、做出防範。

具百萬訂閱的臺灣YouTube頻道「眼球中央電視臺」最近製作了一個名爲「離港求自由......移民臺灣是解答嗎？」的影片，指出臺灣政府在面對港人來臺有許多值得檢討的措施，例如港人申請臺灣的投資定居簽證，必須歷經遙遙無期的漫長等待，這也讓許多港人舉家搬來臺灣之後，面臨到在臺簽證到期而必須遷返回香港的擔憂。片中也提到有來臺尋求政治庇護的香港人表示，由於他們擔憂觸及兩岸敏感話題，所以臺灣政府希望他們避免接受媒體採訪，令人不解臺灣高倡的民主與言論自由何在。

就商務往來而言，香港法院請求在臺清算臺灣《蘋果日報》相關資產一事，臺灣政府以《個資法》限制臺灣《蘋果日報》對香港傳輸公司資料，儘管出於政治或資安考量，政府這個作爲可能有合理之處，但以商業考量而言，現今有許多在臺的跨國公司都在合規的情況下與其他國家（包括香港）的分公司或分部之間共用員工、客戶等公司信息資料。現在臺灣政府有了新的措施，很可能會造成這些跨國公司在資訊傳輸上有所顧慮、無所適從。

隨着臺灣即將於2022年11月舉行的地方選舉與2024年1月的總統、立委選舉，政府對香港公司目前在臺灣的商業活動很可能會加緊審查，這也會造成港商對於在臺投資抱持更多疑慮，甚至讓在香港或中國大陸的臺商也可能面臨到當地政府基於迴應臺灣政府舉措，帶給他們更多商業限制或經營挑戰。

此外，在臺灣派駐香港的「臺北經濟文化辦事處」拒絕簽署港府要求的「一中承諾書」之後，我們也難以預想近期能看到臺港各自代表處能夠恢復以往那樣的正常運作。「臺北經濟文化辦事處」甚至在最近搬遷到了一個更小的辦公空間。長遠來看，缺乏官方政府或代表機構的兩地之間，若要維持正常的貿易往來、人民之間要進行交流、相互理解與對話，想必會面臨越來越多的困難。

既然雙邊合作近期看似無譜，臺灣政府應該考慮採取更積極主動的姿態。延宕多年的潘曉穎命案，在今年2月即將屆滿4年，人在香港並已認罪的兇手陳同佳曾多次透過中間人管浩鳴表示願意前往臺灣自首受審。然而臺灣政府卻提出在讓陳來臺前，香港警方必須與將此案在香港所取得的證詞與證據交予臺灣，並堅持雙方政府要商討陳同佳入境臺灣的前提，如讓臺灣警察飛到香港將他押送來臺等條件。

事實上，鑑於臺灣警方和檢方掌握的證據，臺灣在將這些條件作爲讓陳同佳來臺的前提並不合理。陳一旦提出申請來臺，臺灣政府就應該優先讓他入境。臺灣檢警需要對自己有信心，瞭解臺灣檢方足以根據在臺已蒐證到的法醫報告、監視器畫面等證據來將犯人定罪。他們提出的擔憂─若陳來臺受審後，突然堅稱自己無罪而不認罪，很明顯是一種推諉。臺灣政府對於香港政府所提出的這些「法律上」的堅持，很明顯只是政治手段，他們在這個議題上堅持走雙邊對等的路線，看似關乎主權對等與臺灣的地位提升，或許有助於他們爭取本土選票，但實際上只會讓此案一直持續推延未果，更無法給受害者家屬交代。

（作者爲前美國共和黨亞太區主席，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” (捍衛 本院同仁言論自由) 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.