Borrison/hk-legicost huggingface dataset:
我們也知道，主席亦察悉律政司已在11月24日提出的請求中，就有關事宜提供所需的資料，包括作出以下申明我認為這一點十分重要，亦希望在這裏讀出，讓所有市民知道我們對於把關十分重視，亦明白是十分重要的，而且正如謝偉俊議員所說，這次律政司要求索取文件，並不代表我們放棄《條例》第3條及第4條的任何一個部分"指明文件只可以符合法定條文的方式及按照涉及議會特權的案例所建立的原則，在法庭上使用。
As we may be aware the President also noticed that DoJ has already provided the necessary information in the letter dated 24 November which includes the following elaboration―I opine that this is a very important point and thus would like to read it out so that members of the public would realize how much importance we have attached to our gate - keeping role and understand the importance of the matter . And just as Mr Paul TSE has said acceding to the request of DoJ to submit documents does not mean that we have forgone any part of sections 3 and 4 of the Ordinance―the specified documents may only be used in court in a manner consistent with the statutory provisions in light of the principles developed in decided cases governing parliamentary privilege
我們認為指明文件的擬定用途 並無違反第3及第4條的規定。
We consider that sections 3 and 4 are not infringed as far as the intended use of the specified documents is concerned
指明文件將被用來證明相關的議會程序曾經進行，以及被告人曾經參與該等程序。
The specified documents will be used to prove that the relevant parliamentary proceedings took place and that the Defendant participated in the proceedings
控方只是尋求援引該等文件為證據，以證明相關陳述乃由被告人作出......被告人的言論並非控方的訴訟因由，亦非構成刑事責任的依據，而被告人也不會就其在立法會會議程序中的言論承擔任何刑事責任。
Rather the Prosecution is seeking to adduce the documents as evidence of the fact that such statements were made by the Defendant The words said by the Defendant are not the cause of prosecution action or the foundation of criminality liability and he is not exposed to any criminal liability in respect of what he said in Legislative Council proceedings
"我相信這一段已經非常清晰指出律政司提出這項請求的目的。
I believe this paragraph has clearly set out the purpose of the request put forward by DoJ
很多議員無限上綱或根據無限的想象力說，如果是為這用途的話，根本無需這樣做，又問如果律政司在取得資料後錯誤或不恰當地引用，應該怎麼辦。
Many Members have overplayed the matter or put too much imagination by saying that the request was downright unnecessary for that purpose . They went on to ask what would happen if DoJ used the information incorrectly or inappropriately
雖然我理解議員的憂慮，但我認為也不能夠因而不相信我們的司法制度、不相信法官。
While I appreciate Members concern I do not think we should thus lose trust in our judicial system and judges
正如很多法律界人士已經清楚指出，最後是否同意引用相關文件或內容將會由法官把關。
As many people from the legal sector have clearly pointed out whether the documents or the contents of which will be adduced will eventually be decided by the Judge
難道法官會眼巴巴看着律政司錯誤或不恰當地引用議會的說話內容嗎？
Will the Judge simply let DoJ use the speeches delivered in this Council incorrectly or inappropriately?
我不相信我們的法庭程序是這樣的。
I do not think this is allowed under our court proceedings
很多議員也表示要尊重法治及維護司法獨立，我相信有關的法官亦相信，維護議會的《條例》及確保案件審訊的公平和公義，都是維護法治的重要條件。
Many Members have vowed to respect the rule of law and uphold judicial independence and I trust that the Judge concerned also believes that upholding the Ordinance and ensuring the impartiality and justice of the trial are important prerequisites for upholding the rule of law
因此，我希望大家不要上綱上線，也不要加入太多想象。
Therefore I hope that Members will not overplay the matter or put in too much imagination
主席，總的來說，我認為有關請求合乎程序，亦合乎議會的慣例，所以我看不到為何我們不支持這個請求。
President all in all I think the relevant request is procedurally in order and consistent with the established practices of this Council . Hence I fail to see why we should not support this request
代理主席，我想傳媒拍一下現場，席上非建制派議員鬼影都沒有，他們在真理面前發抖，溜之大吉。
Deputy President I would like to invite media organizations to pan across the Chamber not even one non - establishment Member is present . They shudder before the truth and have thus all sneaked away
在這個過程中，需要搜集證據，需要立法會職員作證，並提供有關紀錄作為佐證。
In the process there is a need to collect evidence to require officers of the Legislative Council to give evidence and to provide the relevant documents as evidence
過去，這種情況在立法會歷史上曾經出現8次，我亦曾經歷這種情況。
Similar incidents occurred eight times in the history of the Legislative Council . I myself had come across such cases
但是，為何今次偏偏會有反對派議員提出這項議案，反對給予許可？
However how come an opposition Member moves a motion this time to refuse granting the leave?
我們在立法會當議員，在議事堂上當然受到《立法會條例》的保障，我們議事時的言論自由受到保護。
As Members of the Legislative Council we are certainly accorded protection in the Chamber under the Legislative Council Ordinance and our freedom of speech is protected when we engage in Council business
但是，這裏是立法會，立法自然要守法，誰說在立法會內可以無法無天呢？
However here in this Legislative Council where legislation is enacted it should naturally abide by the law . Who says that we can be above the law in this Council?
想以《立法會條例》作保護傘，為所欲為，知法犯法，真是荒天下之大謬。
Anyone who thinks that he can use the Ordinance as a protective shield to act wilfully and break the law deliberately is really absurd
今天，梁國雄議員涉嫌直接收受金錢的行為，為何反對派議員視而不見、充耳不聞呢？
Today why do opposition Members turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to Mr LEUNG Kwok - hungs alleged direct acceptance of money?
我同意立法會真是禮崩樂壞，古靈精怪層出不窮。
I very much agree to such saying for there have been endless eccentricities and irregularities in the Council
他們過去只是"拉布"、要求點算法定人數，但現在動輒衝出來圍着主席，已經等同議會暴力。
While they merely engaged in filibustering and calling quorums in the past they now frequently dash out to besiege the President and such acts are already a kind of legislative violence
有反對派議員又表示，特區政府以至梁振英想把他們逐一取消資格。
Some opposition Members further said that the SAR Government and particularly LEUNG Chun - ying want to disqualify them one by one
他們說現在立法會監察政府的權力被收回，令立法會無法走回頭，墮入深淵。
They said that given the present revocation of the Councils power to monitor the Government the Council will plunge into an abyss as it is unable to retreat from the path
主席，我首先希望借我的陳辭，讚賞一下建制派的同事。
President first of all I want to compliment Members belonging to the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong DAB
但是，我也想在此跟建制派同事切磋一下邏輯的問題。
However I would also like to discuss the issue of logic with Members belonging to DAB
既然有"假難民"，即可能有真難民吧？
Since there are bogus refugees there may also be genuine refugees
但是我們說真與假的同時，也要知道他們能夠成為一名難民之前，必須經過一個審核的機制，而在正式確認或審核之前，是不能夠說別人是假的，因為尚未知真假，如果這麼快便將所有聲請者歸類為"假難民"，我覺得邏輯上是說不過去。
However when we are talking about bogus and genuine refugees we need to know that before they can become refugees they have to go through a screening mechanism . Before they are formally verified or screened we cannot say that they are bogus as we still do not know whether they are bogus or not . I think if we categorize them as bogus refugees so soon we cannot possibly pass the test of logic
當然，主席，我也理解，這個世界有很多種邏輯，有些是正常的邏輯，有些可能是建制派的邏輯。
Of course President I also understand that there are many kinds of logic in this world . While some kinds of logic are normal there may also be a logic adopted by DAB
主席，說到這一點，我認為我們作為立法會議員，說話要公道一些。
President at this point I think as Legislative Council Members we have to be fair when we speak
無可否認，我相信現時的情況，免遣返聲請的制度本身存有一些不足之處，甚至是有地方或有機會被人透過這些漏洞，又或是透過一些程序而令自己獲得益處。
It is undeniable that under the existing situation there are some inadequacies in the mechanism for non - refoulement claims and there are even some areas or chances for people to take advantage of the loopholes or procedures for personal gain
這些益處包羅萬有，不一而足，也未必有需要在此詳細闡述。
The gain can be in various forms and it is not necessary for me to describe them in detail here
不過，我們同意有漏洞的存在，但卻不能輕率地說所有透過免遣返聲請制度提出申請的人一定是在濫用制度。
Nonetheless while we recognize the existence of loopholes we cannot recklessly say that all applicants under the mechanism for non - refoulement claims are definitely abusing it
主席，在我們今天辯論題目期間，很多同事，特別是建制派的同事，經常將今次免遣返聲請牽涉的問題說得日趨嚴重。
President during our discussion of the topic today many colleagues Members belonging to DAB in particular always say that the problem concerning non - refoulement claims has become increasingly serious
我也希望大家看看一些實際數字。
I also want Members to look at some actual figures
在今年11月11日，保安事務委員會提出一份"全面檢討處理免遣返聲請的策略"，當中的數據顯示，將2015年第三季度跟今年第三季度比較，相關的申請數字已經下降31%，這個穩定地持續下降的數字並不是謊話，那麼，主席，何謂"問題日趨嚴重"呢？
On 11 November this year there was a paper on comprehensive review of the strategy of handling non - refoulement claims from the Panel on Security . In this paper a comparison of the statistics in the third quarter of 2015 and those in the third quarter this year shows that the number of applications concerned has already dropped by 31 % . The steady decline of the figure concerned is no fabrication
因為最後即使他們的免遣返聲請成功，主席，他們也不是滯留香港，而是可能被送到第三個國家，又或是如果他們申請失敗，便會遭遣返。
It is because even if their non - refoulement claims are successful at the end President they will not stay in Hong Kong but may be sent to a third country or if their applications are rejected they will be repatriated
主席，在這種情況下，其實對這些申請者來說，申請時間越長，便越痛苦，所以在對任何人也沒有好處的情況下，甚麼才是真正的問題呢？
President under the circumstances the longer the period of application the more painful these applicants will be . Hence when no one actually stands to gain what is the real problem?
便是制度上審核時間過長。
It is the exceedingly long period of screening time under the mechanism
當然，我們理解，這可能牽涉資源問題，以致過去拖延了一段長時間。
We of course understand that this may involve the issue of resources the processing of applications has been delayed for quite some time
我相信不論是民主派或建制派同事也一致認同，政府須增撥資源盡快處理申請者的個案，對此我們是完全沒有異議的，有異議的地方在哪裏呢？
I believe that Members from both the democratic camp and the pro - establishment camp will agree that more resources should be allocated by the Government to deal with the applications and we have absolutely no disagreement here . Where does our disagreement lie then?
主席，是在周浩鼎議員原議案提出或其他建制派議員一直說的犯罪問題上。
President it lies in the issue of crime mentioned by Mr Holden CHOW in his original motion or frequently by other Members in the pro - establishment camp
主席，邏輯上，我也希望跟建制派同事切磋一下。
President I would also like to discuss with pro - establishment Members the issue of logic
無可否認，任何族群也有犯法的機會，任何族群也有不法分子，但如果我們簡單地因為某個族群有人犯法，便把整個族群說成是混亂之源，我相信這是不公道的。
It is undeniable that commission of crimes may occur in any ethnic groups and law - breakers are found in any ethnic groups . However if we jump to the conclusion that a certain ethnic group as a whole is the source of social disorder simply because some people in that particular ethnic group have committed crimes I believe that it is unfair to them
難道我們應該設立一個集中營，將所有自由行旅客困起來嗎？
Should we set up a concentration camp to detain all IVS visitors?
這個絕對是錯誤和欠缺邏輯的。
This is absolutely wrong and illogical
如果將同一個邏輯放在今次的提案上，其實也是一樣的。
The situation is similar if we apply the same logic to this motion
主席，簡單來說，公民黨認為要長遠解決免遣返聲請審核程序需時過長的問題，便是加快審核程序，這問題剛才也有觸及。
President in brief the Civic Party thinks that the long - term solution to the problem of prolonged screening time for non - refoulement applications is to expedite the screening process which was touched upon earlier
但是，主席，我特別想在此提出，周浩鼎議員在原議案中提出要增設禁閉營，我認為這已經跟時代脫節，因為以澳洲為例，也有相關設置處理難民，但從中可見，禁閉者在禁閉營中失去自由和失去最基本的尊重，只會令他們製造更大的混亂，從而引起更大的社會成本和事端。
Nevertheless President I want to highlight that Mr Holden CHOW mentions setting up detention camps in his original motion . I think the idea is not in keeping with the times . We can look at the example of Australia where there are related measures to deal with refugees
最後，主席，我們認為社會應該盡量避免污名化或標籤某個族群人士，這是我們作為立法會議員應該要做的。
Even more social costs and greater disturbances will result . I hope that pro - establishment Members can see this point clearly . Finally President we think that our society should try to avoid stigmatizing or labelling people of any particular ethnic group and that is also what we as Legislative Council Members should do
我在這裏再次懇請局方向公眾作出更清晰的教育，這樣才能避免其他不必要的標籤效應。
I hereby urge the Bureau once again to provide clearer education to the public in order to avoid triggering other unnecessary labelling effect
我相信正在收看電視的市民，可能未必真正清楚整件事的來龍去脈。
I believe many members of the public who are now watching the television broadcast may not really understand what the matter is all about
或者，很多人對於在今天這個明媚的星期四下午，一群立法會議員所爭論的事宜，甚至是部分有法律背景的立法會議員娓娓道來的一些法律原則，他們聽起來不太明白，根本說不出所以然。
Perhaps many cannot even put their fingers on what this group of Legislative Council Members are arguing about in this beautiful Thursday afternoon or what legal principles so volubly stated by some Members with legal background are involved
我認為我們有責任為正在收看電視直播的觀眾，簡單說明一個最基本的道理。
I think we have the responsibility to briefly explain a most basic rationale to those who are now watching the television broadcast
我們今天討論的，是律政司要求立法會給予許可，容許他們索取一些相關文件，以處理一宗針對梁國雄議員的公職人員行為失當的案件。
Our discussion today concerns a request made by the Department of Justice DoJ for leave of the Legislative Council to obtain certain relevant documents for handling a case of misconduct in public office instituted against Mr LEUNG Kwok - hung
索取的文件包括會議紀錄、出席紀錄，以及有關梁國雄議員有否在某些會議上說過某些話的文件等。
The documents required include records of meetings attendances of meetings and documents indicating whether Mr LEUNG Kwok - hung had said certain things at certain meetings and so on
主席，聽起來，這是一個十分簡單的法律程序，但容許我在這裏贊同林卓廷議員剛才短小精幹，但擲地有聲的數句說話。
President it seems that only a very simple legal procedure is involved in this matter but allow me to express my concurrence here with the succinct yet powerful remarks made by Mr LAM Cheuk - ting
當然，我們沒有足夠能力聘請一些超越國寶級的大師，書寫數個字便可以籌得數千萬元。
Of course it is beyond our ability to invite some masters who transcend national treasure level to raise tens of millions of dollars for us by just writing a few calligraphic characters
我們無可避免地會質疑背後有否其他不可告人的目的。
Inevitably we will doubt whether there are any hidden agenda
過去數年，我們見識到這個政府如何運用其公權力，在處理不同問題時如何有所偏差，我相信這些問題，其他同事今天亦已娓娓道來。
Over the past few years we have seen how this Government has used public power and how it has handled various issues in a biased manner . I believe some Members have already given an apt description today
就以梁振英為例，他的UGL案件同樣備受質疑，同樣令很多人認為他行為失當，但為何處理辦法有所分別？
Take LEUNG Chun - ying as an example . In the UGL case similar doubts have been raised against him and many people also think that he has committed the offence of misconduct but how come this case is handled differently?
為何建制派議員在面對梁振英的弊案時，態度又似乎跟今次有天淵之別？
How come pro - establishment Members adopt extremely different attitudes towards LEUNG Chun - yings fraud case and the present case?
主席，這就是為何我們心裏有合理的疑問。
President that is why we have our reasonable doubts
謝偉俊議員剛才與我們分享，並展現了他過往從事刑事檢控工作的豐富經驗。
Mr Paul TSE has shared with us his rich experience in prosecution work in the past
根據我非常淺薄的檢控經驗，任何文件或事實的陳述，如果得到辯方的同意、認為沒有爭拗，的確可以列載在"同意案情"的法庭文件上。
As I understand from my limited experience in prosecution any document or statement of fact which is agreed and undisputed by the defence can actually be listed in a judicial document called the Statement of Agreed Facts
正如我剛才所說，在技術層面而言，當一些相關的證供或事實已經變成公眾領域的一部分，其實未必需要透過今次的程序取得。
As I said earlier technically speaking when some relevant evidence or facts have become part of the public domain it may not be necessary to obtain them through the current procedure
無可否認，公道一點說，律政司希望在每一個層面，包括每份證供都由相關人士作出更充分的準備，我是可以理解的。但是，我們必須考慮取得平衡。
Undeniably and to be fair I can understand that DoJ would like to have each evidence in every aspect of the case to be adequately prepared by the person concerned
一方面要方便處理刑事案件，另一方面要顧及議會的尊嚴和既有的規則，尤其是"言論不受檢控"、言論不應該成為任何法律檢控的基礎，這些都是我們過往高舉的原則，因為我們不希望打開任何缺口而成為一個案例。
However we must strike a balance on facilitating the processing of a criminal case and maintaining the dignity of the Council and the established rules particularly the rule that no legal proceedings shall be instituted against any member for words spoken and that the words spoken by any Member shall not form the basis of any legal proceedings instituted against him . These are the principles which we have upheld in the past and we do not wish to open a crack and set a precedent
主席，這個缺口不是為梁國雄議員一人而守護的。
President we are guarding for Mr LEUNG Kwok - hung alone
我可以很負責任地在此對各位說，無論將來情況如何，尤其在政治世界，一天都嫌長的情況下，在席的其他議員或任何一位議員將來有一天可能都會面對其他檢控，我們今天高舉的這項原則都一定會適用於他們。
I can responsibly tell Members that no matter what happens in the future the principle which we uphold today will also apply to them . In the political world one day is too long; Members who are now present in the Chamber or other Members may be prosecuted one day
即使他是一位建制派議員，即使他的言論、政治立場與我們很不同，我們都一定會繼續保護他不受衝擊，尤其是來自行政機關的衝擊。
Even if the Member being prosecuted belongs to the pro - establishment camp and even if his views and political stance are very different from ours we will certainly continue to protect him from any attack particularly from the attack initiated by the Executive Authorities
行政機關打算借制度的一些漏洞來得到想得到的東西，我們要努力保護將來的同僚。
If the Executive Authorities try to take advantage of certain loopholes in the system to get what they want we will strive to protect our Honourable colleagues in the future
正是這個原因，我開首時說我們今天並不是為梁國雄議員一人說話，我們為的是整個議會的制度。
For this reason as I said at the outset we are not speaking for Mr LEUNG Kwok - hung alone but for the benefit of the entire system of the Legislative Council
主席，正如其他同事剛才已很有智慧地說，今次的情況是特別針對1位在職議員的言論，其實是我們之前從未遇過的，這就是為何人們需要張開耳朵，這就是為何香港人要關心這事。
President as other Members have wisely said we have never encountered a case an incumbent Member is being penalized for his words spoken . That is why we have to open our ears; and that is why Hong Kong people have to show concern about this matter
主席，正如郭榮鏗議員剛才很坦白說，我們相信姚松炎議員今次提出的議案成功的機會很低，但是否就代表我們不應該說出一些我們認為是正確的事情？
President as Mr Dennis KWOK frankly said earlier we believe that Dr YIU Chung - yims motion has a slim chance to get passed but does it mean that we should not say what we believe to be the right thing?
我們是否不應該盡最後努力說服在席的建制派同事？
Does it mean that we should not make our final effort to convince our pro - establishment colleagues?
打開缺口的人往往是自己人，而這才是最令人憂慮的地方，希望建制派的同事能夠小心考慮。
Yet very often it is our own people who open the crack and that is most worrying . I hope the pro - establishment Members can give this matter some careful thought
但是，因為有一些高明的律師教唆他們可嘗試酷刑聲請，只要提出聲請，多則十年八年不用離港，少則三年五年，取得"行街紙"後便可在香港工 作。
But now some brilliant lawyers encourage them to try lodging torture claims telling them that they can stay and work in Hong Kong for some three to five years or even eight to ten years as long as they are issued a going - out pass
這根本是另一個問題，涉及兩個問題。
But this is entirely another issue and these are two different issues
其實正正顯示這些在香港工作多年、為香港作出很多貢獻的人覺得得不到人身保障。
These examples precisely show that these people who have been working in Hong Kong for years and are devoted to Hong Kong feel that their personal safety is not protected
周浩鼎議員提出可否成立收容中心，其實這建議是參考了你們非建制派議員的意見的。
Mr Holden CHOW proposes the establishment of holding centres . In fact he comes up with this proposal after considering the views of non - establishment Members
你們說他們三餐不飽、吃得不好，住又住得不好，說可否找地方讓他們住得好一點。
They say that the refugees do not have enough to eat and lack a proper dwelling . They ask whether the refugees can be provided with a proper place to live
那麼成立收容中心又有何不可呢？
If that is the case why is a holding centre not a feasible option?
我們看到現在不單涉及南亞裔同族群體發生問題，也導致整體香港犯罪率上升，直至2015年這5年間的罪案增長接近1倍。
As we can see the problem has now developed into internal conflicts within the South Asian ethnic group and has also resulted in a hike in the crime rate of Hong Kong . In the five years up to 2015 the crime rate here has almost doubled
所以我們現在不是不讓他們申請酷刑 聲請，而是希望加快速度審理聲請申請，並希望成立收容中心有系統地為他們提供統一協助。
Hence we are not forbidding the refugees to lodge torture claims . We just want to expedite the screening of non - refoulement claims and establish holding centres to provide organized and unified assistance to them
我發言支持周浩鼎議員的議案。
I speak in support of Mr Holden CHOWs motion
其中一個關注點是，縱使這些"假難民"可能是他們的同鄉，但這些人來港後從事非法活動，如"打黑工"，連帶影響了他們在大眾市民心目中的形象。
One of the concerns of the local ethnic minorities is that some bogus refugees may indeed be their fellow countrymen but such refugees engage in illegal activities after coming to Hong Kong such as engaging in illegal work and this will ruin their image in society
他們以為"行街紙"就是工作證，到香港後便可以"搵食"。
Some of them think that the going - out pass is the work permit and they can make a living in Hong Kong upon arrival
這些根本就是經濟難民。
They are simply economic refugees
以越南為例，主席，我曾到訪越南，如今越南的經濟非常好，就業方面，可說是全民就業。
Let us take Vietnam as an example President . I have been to Vietnam before . Vietnams economy is doing quite well and it can be said that it has achieved full employment
至於有否政治迫害？
Are there any political persecutions?
當然，宣傳工作要做足，讓他們明白"行街紙"並非工作證。
Of course we should do adequate publicity to let them know that a going - out pass is not a work permit
故此，打擊工作要從源頭做起，我們一定要與不同國家的政府合作。
Therefore if we are to curb the problem at source we should cooperate with the governments in various countries
因此，政府一定要為審批時間設定上限。
For that reason the Government should set a time ceiling for the vetting and approval process
主席，我首先引述2014年7月23日的《信報》社評，標題是"道德高地切勿建築於銅幣之上"。
President let me first quote the editorial of the Hong Kong Economic Journal on 23 July 2014 the title of which is Moral high ground not to be built on money
11月24日進一步提供的資料文件顯示，提交資料與我們一直關注的言論自由沒有衝突。
The letter further submitted on 24 November reveals that the provision of documents does infringe freedom of speech an issue we have all along been concerned about
我引述當中的一段："......要尋求援引該等文件為證據，以證明相關的陳述乃是由被告人作出。
Let me quote one paragraph therein seeking to adduce the documents as evidence of the fact that such statements were made by the Defendant
被告人的言論並非控方的訴訟因由，亦非構成刑事責任的依據，而被告人也不會就其在立法會會議程序中的言論承擔任何刑事責任。
The words said by the Defendant are not the cause of prosecution action or the foundation of criminal liability and he is not exposed to any criminal liability in respect of what he said in LegCo proceedings
反對派、泛民議員一直擔心，一旦開了先例，立法會便會失去言論自由。
The opposition or pan - democratic Members have all along been worried that once a precedent is set the Legislative Council will no longer enjoy freedom of speech
這完全吻合我剛才引述的《信報》社評，儘管《信報》與泛民關係非常友好。
Their behaviour fully meets the description depicted in the editorial of the Hong Kong Economic Journal I quoted just now despite the fact that the newspaper maintains a very friendly relationship with the pan - democrats
他們的擔心都是多餘的，只是堆砌出來的理由，為免自己人受害。
Their concerns are gratuitous and they have merely made up a pretext to avoid victimizing their own people
作為立法會議員，必須以一套道德標準來嚴己，絕不能寬己嚴人。
As Members of the Legislative Council we must apply a uniform set of moral standards to regulate ourselves rather than being lenient to ourselves and harsh to others
如議員在這方面都做得不足，如何能取信於公眾？
If Members are unable to fulfil the requirements how can they win the trust of the public?
我帶來了議員個人利益監察委員會2015年發表的報告書，講及多位受影響的議員，當中有現任亦有離任的。
I have brought with me a report issued by the Committee on Members Interests in 2015 . Several Members were involved including incumbent and former Members
所以，我們要更小心處理，亦要看清楚律政司這次申請特別許可的理據是否充分。
So we must handle this application more carefully and ascertain the sufficiency of DoJs grounds for this special leave application
據我了解，就這次的特別許可申請，律政司早於9月已經與立法會秘書處有書信往來，並提出申請。
As far as my understanding goes DoJ exchanged correspondence on this special leave application with the Legislative Council Secretariat as early as September and put forth its application
簡單而言，即使政府打算因議員在議事廳上一句錯誤的說話而作出起訴，議員是直接受《條例》保障的。
Simply put even if the Government intends to institute prosecution based on a Members erroneous utterance in this Chamber the Member is nonetheless directly protected by the Ordinance
律政司這次索取文件給我的感覺，似乎是想旁敲側擊。
DoJs request for documents this time around gives me the feeling that they seemingly want to use a backhanded approach
既然立法會秘書處發送予律政司的覆函均提及有關的法律原則，我認為這種旁敲側擊的做法是不對的，會影響議員在議事堂的言論保障。
As the Secretariats reply letter to DoJ already refers to the relevant legal principles I do not think it is alright for them to adopt such a backhanded approach as this will adversely affect the protection of Members speeches in this Chamber
身為在立法機關內可以作決定的人，我們是否應該堅守我們在議事廳內的權利及議會的尊嚴呢？
We are the very ones who can make the decision in the legislature . Shouldnt we endeavour to safeguard our rights in this Chamber and the dignity of the legislature?
為了公眾利益，我們是否應該捍衞議員日後可以得到相同的保障呢？
For the sake of public interests shouldnt we strive to ensure that Members can receive the same protection in the future?