Ah, past times - and what do we learn?

Couldn't resist the temptation of LoTR tonight, and watched almost the whole thing. And it recalled my memories about the past times... oh dear, I think I was first drawn by this fascinating story when I was... in Form 5? I forgot, but it was one of the movies that drawn and touched me so much that I see the beauty in human, so much as the evil as well. Never have the determination to pick up the book, and this time it's too late - school has started. Boo.

Another past time... yes, it has been five years already, and I remembered I was somewhere in the wild having my first (and only) wildcamp that night. And the World Trade Center fell. Both towers. It came to us as a total shock but we were in an Outward Bound camp, meaning that we did not have television access until three days later. Five years... what has the world learnt? We had more wars than the 1990s, and we had more hatred and terrorist attacks around us. When will we learn the proper way of living peacefully with another race, with another people?

Peace has been restored in the Middle World under Tolkien's construction, with love and trust between the elves, humans, dwarfs, hobbits and wizards. Can we ever foster some love and trust between U.S. and the Middle East? I mourn for the civilian deaths - both in the U.S., Afghanistan and Iraq - because we are all humans. And we are meant to be equal and capable of co-existing peacefully.

While we claim ourselves civilized, does it only mean that we need not shed blood from our hands after killing because we can only press a button and kill many in thousands of miles away?

公義？

暑假將盡，一群唸法律的同學也快要重新投入校生活了。好些同學到過律師樓或其他相關的機構工作後，都對這年的暑期工有了一些體會。

有趣的是，從律師樓實習回來的同學會問一句：「社會的公義如今仍能靠法律維持嗎？我們的法律又可做到什麼？」還記得當初自己選讀政法時，一心以為法律就是維持公平、公義的依靠，保護好人、懲罰惡人，就像包公那樣；讀了兩年的書，才發現如今不少法律工作者並非這樣想，又或者已經忘了這樣想。不是要為含冤受屈的人仗義出頭還分文不收才算得上捍衛公義 (否則所有律師都不得不乞食！)，但正如一位朋友所說的，當律師的求情理由變得公式，將每個有血有肉的故事和經歷化成迎合案例方便法官判案的「格式化案情」，我們是在為每一個當事人謀求公義嗎？

小時候對一個問題覺得很掙扎：「如果一個殺人犯來找我當辯護律師，並且直認不諱自己殺了人，那我還該替他辯護嗎？法學院的答案是應該，因為我們的法制之下，每個人都當受法律保護，可以請律師代表出庭的權利，是法律公平對待所有人的表現。這個答案讓我放心的進來法學院，但我在報章上看到的，是律師們以程序不當為由──例如截聽沒有申請手令，使截聽得來的內容呈了堂也不能算數──還是要無罪釋放，社會只好眼巴巴看著犯案者逍遙法外，長嘆一聲「天理何在」。

法律是維持社會公義的最後一道防線。中國人有一句話叫「無法無天」，無法，幾乎就真的等於沒了天，沒有了儒家思想中「天」所代表的公理──不然，世界各國不會對制訂法律如此趨之若鶩，上至政府憲法，下至小市民「約法三章」，規矩和法律俯拾皆是。但當我們的律師變成了鑽法律空子的專家，能夠把証據確鑿的罪名開脫的就是聰明、能幹、可以賺大錢，我們的公義就將會被趕到牆角去了。法學院裡有的盡是聰明絕頂的未來社會棟樑，文字功力、急才、心思慎密樣樣俱備，為什麼離開了學校以後，捍衛公義的心志就會消失於無形之間呢？

為被告辯護不是為了替他洗脫罪名，而是為了確保法律對他有不偏不倚的判決。如果我把殺人犯們的罪名都給開脫了，法律還有何用？如果法律已經靠不住，我們就只好仰仗公義的上帝去施行「報應」了。這不可能是一個健康的社會所樂見的。

做人不要忘本，做律師的，或是於社會公義上有份的，請也不要忘了法律之本──公義。有則改之，無則嘉勉。我絕對無意以偏概全，我也願意相信，法律界中將社會公義拋諸腦後的人只屬少數。

2006.09.03