Borrison/hk-legicost huggingface dataset:
有委員因而認為，僱主如果沒有遵從復職或再次聘用令的規定，即使有關僱主向僱員支付法院或勞審處判給僱員的3筆款項，亦應被視作刑事罪行，以加強阻嚇僱主不合理及不合法解僱僱員的行為，特別是參與工會活動的僱員。
Some members have therefore taken the view that the employers failure to comply with an order for reinstatement or re - engagement should be made a criminal offence even though the employer would pay the employee the three sums awarded by the court or Labour Tribunal . This would enhance the deterrent effect against unreasonable and unlawful dismissal of employees particularly those who have participated in trade union activities
政府當局解釋，勞顧會的共識是，與其向僱主施加刑事法律責任，不如讓有關僱員可盡快獲得終止僱傭金、補償及額外款項。
The Administration has explained that instead of imposing criminal liability on employers it is the consensus of LAB that the employee concerned should be paid the terminal payments compensation and further sum in an expeditious manner
然而，根據《條例草案》，僱主如果故意或無合理辯解而不向僱員支付額外款項，即屬犯罪。
However an employer who wilfully and without reasonable excuse fails to pay the further sum to an employee commits an offence under the Bill
法案委員會對《條例草案》恢復二讀辯論並無異議，亦不會就《條例草案》動議任何修正案。
The Bills Committee raises no objection to the resumption of the Second Reading debate on the Bill and it will not propose any amendments to the Bill
主席，法案委員會察悉，政府當局原先打算在2018年1月31日的立法會會議上恢復《條例草案》的二讀辯論，其後當局表示，由於個別委員就《條例草案》提出的修正案並未在法案委員會及勞顧會討論，因此須先撤回恢復二讀辯論的預告。
President the Bills Committee has noted that the Administration had intended to resume the Second Reading debate on the Bill at the Legislative Council meeting of 31 January 2018 . The Administration had subsequently indicated that it had to withdraw the notice to resume the Second Reading debate because an individual member had proposed amendments to the Bill which had never been discussed at the Bills Committee and LAB
政府當局於今年4月致函法案委員會，表示已就有關修正案向勞顧會作出匯報，並會按《條例草案》原本方案，恢復二讀辯論。
In April this year the Administration issued a letter to the Bills Committee noting that it had reported to LAB on the amendments concerned and that the Second Reading debate on the Bill could be resumed based on the original proposals
在這個安排下，僱員可無須再次向勞審處提出申請，而盡早取得額外款項。
Under this arrangement the employee will be spared the need to file another application to the Labour Tribunal and will obtain the further sum the soonest possible
此外，這筆額外款項的上限亦有所提高，這是勞顧會考慮了上屆立法會議員審議《2016年條例草案》的意見後作出的共識，由50,000元提高至72,500元或僱員每月工資的3倍。
In addition the ceiling of the further sum has also been raised . As a consensus reached by LAB after considering the views expressed by the last Legislative Council during the scrutiny of the 2016 Bill the ceiling has been raised from 50,000 to 72,500 or three times the employees monthly wage
如果僱主故意及無理解僱而不支付額外款項，即屬犯罪。
Any employer who wilfully and without reasonable excuse fails to pay the further sum to an employee commits an offence
再者，《條例草案》亦對僱主及繼承人或相聯公司根據再次聘用命令聘用僱員的安排程序及各自責任作出補充條文。
Furthermore the Bill also seeks to make supplementary provisions on the procedural arrangement for the engagement of the employee by the employer and the successor or associated company under an order for re - engagement and on the respective obligations of the parties involved
僱員如獲得僱主的繼承人或相聯公司再次聘用，其先前在原有僱主的服務年期將獲新僱主接受和承認。
If the employee is re - engaged by the employers successor or associated company his or her previous length of service with the original employer will be accepted and recognized by the new employer
這些安排均優化了現行的《僱傭條例》，加強了對僱員的保障。
These arrangements have enhanced the existing Employment Ordinance by strengthening the protection for employees
所以，我與民建聯均支持《條例草案》。
As such both DAB and I support the Bill
在法案委員會審議《條例草案》期間，其中有一點是委員討論較多的，我在此再論述一下。
During the scrutiny of the Bill by the Bills Committee Members have particularly raised one point which I will hereby further elaborate on
有委員甚至認為，即使僱主將僱員復職或再次聘用，亦可能故意刁難僱員，令僱員感到沒有尊嚴或最後忍受不住而自行辭職。
Some members have even suggested that even the employee is reinstated or re - engaged the employer may still deliberately create difficulties for the employee . In the end the employee will resign on his or her own initiative over the loss of dignity or suffering beyond endurance
對此，我是不認同的。
I do not think that will be the case
其實僱傭關係不應被視作對立面，僱主與僱員之間應該是合作夥伴。
In fact employer - employee relationship should not be viewed as confrontational and employers and employees should be partners working in collaboration
我深信僱主希望與僱員保持良好、長遠的僱傭關係，大家並肩工作，令到僱員有得着，亦令到公司持續發展，這才能夠締造雙贏，而所謂無良或刻薄僱主只是小部分的害群之馬。
I strongly believe that employers hope to maintain good long - term employment relationship with employees . By working shoulder to shoulder employees will benefit and their companies can sustain their development . Only then will a win - win situation be created
坦白說，在勞審處頒令僱員獲得復職或再次聘用後，我相信僱主會依法作出安排。
The so - called unscrupulous or mean employers are only the black sheep in a small number . Frankly speaking after the Labour Tribunal has made an order for reinstatement or re - engagement I believe that employers will make arrangement in accordance with the law
只是僱傭雙方一旦對簿公堂，關係可能已經轉差，再次合作亦不會愉快。
However after employers and employees had confronted each other in court their relationship would have possibly turned worse and they would no longer be on good terms even if they work together again
額外款項可以說是另一種安排，令到僱員不用經過冗長的法律程序，可以盡快得到額外補償，因而更為有利及實際。
The further sum arrangement offers an alternative arrangement under which employees can obtain the further sum the soonest possible without going through protracted and tedious legal proceedings . This arrangement is thus more beneficial and practicable
額外款項這項安排，是勞資雙方經過勞顧會有效的商議平台達成的共識。
The further sum arrangement is a consensus reached between employers and employees through the effective negotiation platform of LAB
除了要考慮對僱員提供充分保障外，亦要兼顧企業尤其是中小企僱主的承擔能力，取得一個適當的平衡。
In order to strike an appropriate balance we should consider not only the need to provide adequate protection for employees but also the affordability of enterprises particularly the owners of small and medium enterprises
僱員得到72,500元額外款項之外，亦會得到終止僱傭金及不超過15萬元的補償，即合共3筆款項，款額不算少，對僱主來說有一定的影響力。
In addition to a further sum of 72,500 employees will also get a terminal payment and a compensation not exceeding 150,000 . In other words the employees will get three sums altogether which should not be regarded as a small amount . This will certainly have an impact on employers
《2016年條例草案》在上屆立法會已因為有委員提出修正案，以致勞顧會需要進一步研究而被擱置。
The 2016 Bill was shelved in the last Legislative Council because a member had proposed amendments thereto which required further studies by LAB
我對於委員臨時提出修正案的做法不表認同。
I do not endorse the members move to propose amendments on an ad hoc basis
政府現時已安排《條例草案》恢復二讀辯論，而由於張超雄議員的修正案未有在法案委員會中討論，亦未在勞顧會取得共識，我及民建聯均反對修正案。
The Government has currently made arrangement for the resumption of the Second Reading debate on the Bill . And since the amendments of Dr Fernando CHEUNG had not been discussed at the Bills Committee and no consensus had been reached at LAB both DAB and I oppose the amendments
在這方面，政府今年做到了。
This year the Government is able to put it into practice
我們希望可藉此鼓勵更多殘障人士就業，亦希望政府牽頭聘用更多殘疾人士。
We seek to promote the employment of PWDs and hope that the Government will take the initiative to employ more PWDs
所以，我們在支持今年這項新增的殘疾人士免稅額之餘，亦呼籲政府推行更積極的措施，讓更多殘疾人士有機會就業，因為就業確是一種基本權利。
Therefore while supporting the introduction of a new personal disability allowance this year we also call on the Government to implement more positive measures to provide more employment opportunities for PWDs as employment is indeed a fundamental right
政府估計今年這個項目會令稅收減少4億5,000萬元，但根據我的初步計算，恐怕這是過分高估，因為根據政府現時的建議，只有領取傷殘津貼的人士才可享有這項免稅額。
The Government estimated that this proposal would lead to a reduction in revenue by 450 million but according to my preliminary calculation I am afraid that the amount has been overestimated . According to the Governments present proposal only recipients of disability allowance are eligible for this new allowance
如果按此推算，即有57,000多名殘疾人士有機會從事經濟活動並受薪。
On this basis 57 000 PWDs had the opportunity to participate in economic activities and receive income
不過，2013年報告亦指出，殘疾人士的薪金中位數只有1萬元，遠較當年整體人口的薪金中位數13,000元為低。
However the 2013 report further highlighted that the median monthly employment earnings of PWDs was only 10,000 which was much lower than the median employment earnings of 13,000 of the overall population back then
如果按照這個比例推算，在57,000多名領取傷殘津貼的受薪人士中，便有27,000多人可享新增的免稅額，但按標準稅率計算卻不可能有這麼多人，因為殘疾人士的收入明顯較低。
Based on this percentage it is projected that of the 57 000 recipients of disability allowance who are income earners more than 27 000 are eligible for the new allowance . Yet the number will not be so big if we calculate using the standard rate because the income of PWDs is notably lower
要達到15%標準稅率的水平，按梁繼昌議員所說，年薪必須超過200萬元。
For taxpayers paying tax at the standard rate of 15 % their annual earnings must be over 2 million according to Mr Kenneth LEUNG
在現有制度下，我恐怕這項稅務優惠暫時未能取得明顯的效果，我認為政府最少應該牽帶聘用更多殘疾人士。
Under the existing system however I am afraid that the present tax incentives may not be able to achieve any notable effect for the time being . In my opinion the Government should at least take the initiative to employ more PWDs
政府在過去曾經表示，公務員體制內約有2%是殘疾人士。
The Government once said that PWDs represented 2 % of the strength of the Civil Service
然而，數據顯示，政府每年聘用的殘疾人士均在90人以下，不是70多人，便是50多人，但每年離開公務員隊伍的殘疾人士卻有超過200人。
However statistics showed that the Government employed less than 90 PWDs every year only either 70 - odd or 50 - odd but more than 200 of them left the Civil Service in each year
因此，我認為這是誤導性的數據，令人以為政府的公務員隊伍有2%是殘疾人士，但這是騙人的。
Therefore I think the relevant figure misleading as it gives people an impression that PWDs represented 2 % of the strength of the Civil Service which is deceiving
因此，我們在贊同這次的稅務優惠之餘，也想請政府落實聘用殘疾人士的指標。
Thus while we support the present tax incentives we would like to call on the Government to achieve this target set for the employment of PWDs
貧富懸殊與貧窮固然是兩種不同的概念，但卻互有關連，只是我們無法通過第二次財富分配，令貧窮率有效減低。
While wealth disparity and poverty are two different concepts they are somehow interrelated . And yet we have failed to effectively bring down the rate of poverty through wealth redistribution
因此，代理主席，雖然我們並不反對這項《條例草案》，因為它的方向正確，但力度卻嫌不足夠。
Therefore Deputy President although we do not oppose the Bill which is heading towards the right direction the proposals are not vigorous enough
低收入人士未必能夠受惠於《條例草案》，而一些中產人士現時亦面對很多額外開支，包括子女教育的開支，很多中產家庭都要為子女的教育躊躇，而有特殊教育需要的額外開支尤其多，但他們卻未必能夠受惠於政府的幫助。
While low - income earners may not be able to benefit from the Bill many middle - class people are now bearing many additional expenses including the expenditure on childrens education . Many middle - class families have to plan for their childrens education and families with children having special education needs may incur even more additional expenses but the assistance provided by the Government may not benefit them at all
至於房屋開支，我也不用多說，因為今天的樓價已遠遠超過一般人的經濟負擔能力。
As for housing expenses I do not have too much to say because the current property prices have far exceeded the affordability of an average person
至於醫療開支方面，仍有很多藥物需要自費。
As for medical expenses a large number of medicines are still purchased by patients
如果政府問錢從何來，這次的稅制改革或稅務修訂正好提供所需的款項。
If the Government asks where the money comes from the present tax reform or tax revision may provide the necessary funding
如果把稅制變成累進式稅階，正如梁繼昌議員建議取消標準稅率，全部改用累進式稅階計算，我相信政府的收入將會大大增加，屆時便可以投放更多資源，讓中產和低收入人士受惠。
If we adopt progressive tax bands and abolish the standard rate as proposed by Mr Kenneth LEUNG so that tax payment will be calculated on the basis of progressive tax bands I believe government revenue will greatly increase . The Government can then devote more resources and bring benefits to the middle class and low - income earners
在殖民地年代，梁耀忠議員曾代表勞工界提出《不公平解僱條例草案》，但當年港英政府為了阻止該法案獲得通過，搶先提出法例條文，即現時的《條例》第VIA部。
During the colonial era Mr LEUNG Yiu - chung once proposed an Unfair Employment Bill on behalf of the labour sector . To prevent the passage of the Bill the British Hong Kong Government took pre - emptive action to introduce certain provisions which form Part VIA of the existing Ordinance
與梁耀忠議員的議員法案相比，第VIA部很多關鍵細節付之闕如。
Compared with the Members Bill of Mr LEUNG Yiu - chung many details could not be found in Part VIA
簡單來說，第VIA部沒有賦予僱員免遭不公平解僱的權利，充其量只是堵塞長期服務金的法律漏洞，避免僱主為了逃避支付長期服務金而在僱員累積足夠年資前將其解僱。
Simply put Part VIA does not provide employees with the right to fight against unfair dismissal . It can at best plug the legal loophole involving long service payment by preventing an employer from dismissing an employee whose length of service is about to qualify him for long service payment
第VIA部生效至今，已超過20年，政府並沒有打算全面檢討僱傭保障的條文，對多個關鍵問題視若無睹，置若罔聞。
Though Part VIA has been in force for over 20 years the Government has no intent to review comprehensively the employment protection provisions . It simply ignores many key issues
現在辯論的《條例草案》只是對《條例》VIA部作出小修小補。
The Bill in question only makes patchy fixes to Part VIA of the Ordinance
政府早於2000年4月已經完成檢討有關條文，此事已載於立法會秘書處法律事務部準備的背景資料簡介，而勞工顧問委員會亦在年報中承認，早於2000年已同意有關的修訂，但政府拖了18年，仍未能完成有關的立法程序。
As stated in the background brief prepared by the Legal Service Division of Legislative Council Secretariat the Government completed the review of the relevant provisions in as early as April 2000 and the Labour Advisory Board LAB also admitted in its year book that it agreed to the relevant amendments in 2000 . After stalling for 18 years the Government has yet to complete the relevant legislative procedure
試問有哪個僱主在無理解僱工人後，會主動同意讓工人復職？
Will any employer voluntarily agree to reinstate the worker whom he has unreasonably dismissed?
因為這荒謬的安排，《條例》第VIA部中有關復職的條文形同虛設。
Because of this ridiculous arrangement the provisions on reinstatement in Part VIA of the Ordinance are practically useless
根據勞工處提供的數字，在2011年至2017年期間，有5,000多宗根據第VIA部提出的申索，其中有4,700宗審結，僱員獲 判勝訴的個案有3,600多宗，勝訴的比率接近八成，而當中有多少提出申索的僱員獲判復職或再次聘用？
According to the statistics provided by the Labour Department over 5 000 claims were made by employees under Part VIA between 2011 and 2017 . Among them 4 700 of the cases were concluded and over 3 600 cases were ruled in favour of the employees . How many employees in those cases were eventually reinstated or re - engaged?
一如所料，是零。
None as expected
道理很簡單，要僱主同意或僱主和僱員雙方同意，僱員才可復職，這簡直是緣木求魚。
The reason is very simple . As an employee can only be reinstated with the consent of the employer or with the consent of both the employer and the employee the chance of reinstatement is like climbing a tree to catch fish
政府今次提出的《條例草案》對這荒謬安排略作修補，如果《條例草案》獲得通過，日後僱員遭不合理及不合法解僱時，即如果僱員因為分娩、傷病、參加工會或在法律程序中作供等理由而遭僱主解僱，法院和勞審處可無須僱主同意而作出復職或再次聘用的命令。
The Government now introduces the Bill to slightly revise this ridiculous arrangement . If the Bill is passed and in future if an employee is unreasonably and unlawfully dismissal for reasons of pregnancy and maternity leave injury or illness participation in trade union activities or giving evidence in a legal proceeding the court or Labour Tribunal can make an order for reinstatement or re - engagement without the agreement of the employer
在這種情況下，僱員即使勝訴，基本上只可獲判終止僱傭金，而僱員應獲得的按比例支付的遣散費和長期服務金，僱主亦可根據現行的強制性公積金制度對沖安排，與之對沖。
Under such circumstances even if an employee wins the lawsuit he can basically receive a terminal payment but the pro - rata severance payment and long service payment that he is entitled to can be offset by the employers contribution to the Mandatory Provident Fund under the present arrangement
民事補救顯然不足，對僱主亦沒有足夠的阻嚇力。
The civil remedy is obviously insufficient and has no deterrent effect on the employer
民事補救的原則是盡量令受害人回復原狀，所以不合理解僱最優先的考慮補救措施應是讓僱員在原來崗位復職，其次是在類似崗位再獲聘用，兩者皆不切實可行，才考慮予以金錢賠償，而賠償金額亦應足以彌補受害人的實際損失。
The principle of civil remedy is to reinstate the victim as far as possible . Hence the first remedy to be considered should be to reinstate the employee to his original post the second consideration is to re - engage him in a similar position and only when both remedies are impracticable should a monetary compensation be considered but the amount of money should be sufficient to compensate the actual loss of the victim
很多人誤會政府今次提出的《條例草案》，能令僱員在無須得到僱主的同意下亦能復職，但《條例草案》實際上只是規定，僱員若遭不合理及不合法解僱，法院和勞審處作出復職或再次聘用的命令時，無須得到僱主的同意，但僱員要真正獲得復職或再次聘用，仍需要僱主同意，最終的決定權仍在僱主手上。
Many people mistakenly think that the Bill now proposed by the Government can reinstate the employee without the employers agreement . But actually the Bill provides that only when a dismissal is an unreasonable and unlawful can the court or Labour Tribunal make an order for reinstatement or re - engagement without the agreement of the employer . But the reinstatement or re - engagement of the employee still needs the employers agreement and hence the final decision still rests with the employer
《條例草案》新增的第32N條明文規定，僱主只須支付額外款項及其他補償，僱員便無權強制執行復職或再次聘用令。
The new section 32N10 of the Bill stipulates that as long as the employer pays a further sum and other compensations the employee has no right to enforce the order for reinstatement or re - engagement
所以，勞工界批評這安排等同容許僱主用錢"買起"僱員獲得復職或再次聘用的權利。
The labour sector criticizes that this arrangement is tantamount to allowing the employer to buy up the employees right to be reinstated or re - engaged
我曾代表工黨草擬委員會審議階段修正案，規定由僱員決定是否同意僱主支付額外款項或作其他金錢補償，以代替遵從復職或再次聘用令。
I have drafted a Committee stage amendment on behalf of the Labour Party stipulating that the employee can decide whether he accepts the further sum or other monetary compensations payable by the employer in lieu of the order for reinstatement or re - engagement
僱員若不同意僱主以金錢作補償，他有權強制執行復職或再次聘用令。
If the employee does not accept the employers monetary compensation he has the right to mandatorily enforce the order for reinstatement or re - engagement
可惜該修正案被主席"老人家"裁決為與《條例草案》的主題無關而未能提出。
Regrettably the amendment was ruled by our dear President as irrelevant to the object of the Bill and cannot be proposed
除了剛才提及在不合理解僱的情況下，如果沒有取得僱主同意，法庭和勞審處仍然不可作出復職和再次聘用的命令這荒謬安排外，《條例》第VIA部仍然有兩大缺憾，在今次的法例修訂中未獲處理。
Apart from the ridiculous arrangement mentioned just now that without the agreement of the employer the court or Labour Tribunal cannot make an order for reinstatement or re - engagement in respect of an unreasonable dismissal there are two other big defects in Part VIA of the Ordinance that have not addressed in this legislative amendment exercise
我認為政府應盡快堵塞這些漏洞。
I think the Government should plug these loopholes as soon as possible
首先，固定期限的合約僱員，若因參加工會、分娩、工傷等原因，在約滿後不獲續約，並不能根據《條例》第VIA部有關不合理及不合法解僱的條文提出民事補償申索。
First if employees on fixed term contracts do not have their contracts renewed on grounds of their participation in trade unions pregnancy work injury and so on they cannot claim for civil remedy under the provisions of unreasonable and unlawful dismissal in Part VIA of the Ordinance
近年來，越來越多僱員按固定期限合約受聘，包括教育和很多公共行政的職位。
In recent years an increasing number of employees are employed on fixed term contracts including teaching and public administration positions
該漏洞不單令固定期限合約僱員毫無僱傭保障，黃偉國事件更是打壓工會，製造寒蟬效應和白色恐怖的實例。
The loophole deprives employees on fixed term contract of employment protection and the Dr Benson WONG incident is a concrete example of suppressing unions creating chilling effect and white terror
《條例》第VIA部的另一大缺憾，是即使僱員遭到不合理及不合法解僱，在沒有復職或重新聘用令的情況下，僱員只可獲得一筆不超過15萬元的補償，這並不符合民事保障的一般原則，即賠償金額須足以彌補受害人的實際損失。
Another major defect of Part VIA of the Ordinance is that even if an employee is unreasonably and unlawfully dismissed without an order for reinstatement or re - engagement he can only receive a compensation not exceeding 150,000 which is against the general principle of civil protection that is the amount of compensation must be sufficient to cover the victims actual loss
正如已故填詞人林振強曾說："任何電視節目只要見到'阿叻'有份出現，你就知道這個節目必定會變成 業餘、不認真和像馬戲團一樣。
As the late lyricist Richard LAM once said If you see Natalis CHAN showing up in any television programme you will know that the programme will definitely be amateurish and frivolous just like a farce
"勞顧會就好像"阿叻"一樣，任何保障勞工的法例，只要經過勞顧會討論，都會變成不倫不類......形同虛設，浪費時間。
LAB is just like Natalis; any labour protection legislation discussed by LAB will become neither fish nor fowl serving no purpose and a waste of time
據報，國務院港澳事務辦公室一位前主任於上月底被傳媒問到，曾在香港特別行政區呼叫"結束一黨專政"口號的人士可否參選立法會。
It has been reported that late last month a former Director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council was asked by the media on whether people who had chanted end the one - party dictatorship slogan in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region HKSAR might run for the Legislative Council LegCo election
他回答："應該不可以，因為這是違反國家的《憲法》，是一種違法行為"。
He replied that it should be the case that they may not as such an act contravenes the Countrys Constitution and is an unlawful act
主席，就毛議員的質詢，經徵詢律政司後，現綜合答覆如下： 根據《中華人民共和國憲法》的序言，"憲法以法律的形式確認了中國各族人民奮鬥的成果，規定了國家的根本制度和根本任務，是國家的根本法，具有最高的法律效力。
President having consulted the Department of Justice our consolidated reply to Ms Claudia MOs question is as follows According to the Preamble of the Constitution of the Peoples Republic of China [t]he Constitution in legal form affirms the achievements of the struggles of the Chinese people of all nationalities and defines the basic system and basic tasks of the State; it is the fundamental law of the State and has supreme legal authority
全國各族人民、一切國家機關和武裝力量、各政黨和各社會團體、各企業事業組織，都必須以憲法為根本的活動準則，並且負有維護憲法尊嚴、保證憲法實施的職責。
The people of all nationalities all State organs the armed forces all political parties and public organizations and all enterprises and institutions in the country must take the Constitution as the basic standard of conduct and they have the duty to uphold the dignity of the Constitution and ensure its implementation
" 《憲法》第三十一條訂明："國家在必要時得設立特別行政區。
Article 31 of the Constitution provides that [t]he State may establish special administrative regions when necessary
在特別行政區內實行的制度按照具體情況由全國人民代表大會以法律規定"。
The systems to be instituted in special administrative regions shall be prescribed by law enacted by the National Peoples Congress NPC in the light of specific conditions
《憲法》第六十二條訂明全國人民代表大會行使的職權，包括第十四項："決定特別行政區的設立及其制度"。
Article 62 of the Constitution prescribes the functions and powers that may be exercised by NPC including as provided by sub - paragraph 14 to decide on the establishment of special administrative regions and the systems to be instituted there
根據《憲法》，全國人民代表大會制定《中華人民共和國香港特別行政區基本法》，規定香港特別行政區實行的制度，以保障國家對香港的基本方針政策的實施，即"一國兩制"、"港人治港"和"高度自治"。
In accordance with the Constitution NPC enacted the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region HKSAR of the Peoples Republic of China prescribing the systems to be practised in HKSAR in order to ensure the implementation of the basic policies of the Peoples Republic of China regarding Hong Kong namely one country two systems Hong Kong people administering Hong Kong and a high degree of autonomy
國家主席習近平在去年7月1日慶祝香港回歸20周年大會暨香港特別行政區第五屆政府就職典禮上明確指出："《基本法》是根據《憲法》制定的基本法律，規定了在香港特別行政區實行的制度和政策，是'一國兩制'方針的法律化、制度化，為'一國兩制'在香港特別行政區的實踐提供了法律保障。
At the Celebrations of the 20 Anniversary of Hong Kongs Return to the Motherland and the Inaugural Ceremony of the Fifth Term Government of the HKSAR on 1 July last year President XI Jinping clearly stated that [t]he Basic Law is a basic legislation enacted in accordance with the Constitution . It stipulates the systems and policies practised in HKSAR codifies into law and makes institutional arrangement for the principle of one country two systems and provides legal safeguards for the practice of one country two systems in HKSAR
"《基本法》第十一條第一款規定，根據《憲法》第三十一條，香港特別行政區的制度和政策，包括社會、經濟制度，有關保障居民的基本權利和自由的制度，行政管理、立法和司法方面的制度，以及有關政策，均以《基本法》的規定為依據。
Article 111 of the Basic Law stipulates that in accordance with Article 31 of the Constitution the systems and policies practised in HKSAR including the social and economic systems the system for safeguarding the fundamental rights and freedoms of its residents the executive legislative and judicial systems and the relevant policies shall be based on the provisions of the Basic Law
既然《憲法》第三十一條已經授權全國人民代表大會以法律規定特別行政區實行的制度，那麼按照《憲法》第三十一條，全國人民代表大會制定的《基本法》所規定的特別行政區制度和政策，就具有優 先適用的地位。
As Article 31 of the Constitution already authorizes NPC to prescribe the systems to be instituted in special administrative regions by law in accordance with Article 31 of the Constitution the systems and policies of HKSAR that were prescribed in the Basic Law and enacted by NPC shall have an overriding status
因此，《憲法》關於社會主義制度和政策的規定不在香港特別行政區實施。
Therefore the provisions on the socialist system and policies in the Constitution are not implemented in HKSAR
《憲法》和《基本法》共同構成香港特區的憲制基礎。
The Constitution and the Basic Law form the constitutional basis of HKSAR