大家
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[大家]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[加拿大著名人权律师安世立支持声援全球绝食抗暴的声明]
郭国汀律师专栏
·废除或修改煽动颠覆国家政权罪思想监狱中国律师集体第一议案的诞生
·团结起来共同对敌 答刘路先生的公开信
·敦促刘路公开辩污的公开函
·敦促刘路公开辩污的最后通牒
·我为法轮功抗辩——答刘路质询函
***自由人权宪政共和民主之路争论
·中国人缺少宽容精神么?
·郭国汀评价刘晓波诺奖
·关于刘晓波是否合格人选答阮杰函
·郭国汀评刘晓波之伪无敌论
·中共怪异重判刘晓波的意图旨在克意扶持默契能控的民运‘领袖’
·质疑刘晓波先生盛赞俞可平民主论 郭国汀
·我愿意出任刘晓波2006/guoguoting/68
·郭国汀与刘晓波先生关于人民起义权利的对话
·刘晓波案之我见
·郭国汀预言刘晓波与中共之间的默契
·刘晓波虚伪有余而真诚不足
·强烈谴责中共专制暴政公然践踏法律枉法刑拘刘晓波先生!
·为什么应当支持刘晓波?
·郭国汀邀请刘晓波公开论战的函
·告别自由中国论坛网友公开函
·郭国汀:质疑一个刘晓波超过全部民运人士
***(48)人权律师思想辩护策略论战
·律师应当如何为颠复及煽动颠复国家政权罪抗辩?----就如何为郭泉、谢长发、刘晓波、谭作人等民主斗士抗辩答网友咨询
·辩护律师为法轮功讲真相案件辩护的基本原则 郭国汀
·真正的刑辩大律师! 郭国汀
·深入骨髓的奴性!
·《九评共产党》是没有价值的政治大字报?
·如何识别网警共特?----答毕时园伙计的质疑
·中共网络别动队业已渗透大量西方中文网站
·什么是南郭之一不怕死二不爱钱?
·答草兄及建强兄质疑
·答张鹤慈先生质疑
·刘荻为何害怕这篇文章? 中国知识分子死了!
·郭国汀答小乔函
***(49)重大人权案件辩护
·民运英雄杨天水危在旦夕
·强烈谴责中共暴政企图暗杀冯正虎先生的流氓下三滥作为!
·关注声援支持人权律师刘士辉,强烈抗议流氓暴政的政治迫害人权律师!
·呼吁全球华人关注支持民族英雄郭泉博士
·真正的知识分子英雄郭泉博士
·决不以出卖灵魂出卖人格尊严为代价打官司
·严正警告流氓无赖中共匪帮
·南郭警告胡锦涛别再玩火!
·强烈谴责中共暴政枉法滥捕自由作家谭作人先生
·胡锦涛最害怕最恨谁?
·为申曦(曾节明)作证的证明函
·论颠覆及煽动颠覆国家政权罪
·颠覆国家政权罪的法理解析
·中共阉法院认定的颠覆国家政权案件"犯罪事实"简析
·关注声援支持中国知识分子英雄郭泉博士
·我为郭泉博士抗辩
·敬请各界朋友关注声援支持民主斗士郭泉教授
·郭国汀律师称中共颠覆(煽动颠覆)国家政权罪系违宪恶法
·烈女邓玉娇传记六则
·“法学专家”是因“理性”还是因“奴性”而胡说八道?!
·强烈谴责胡锦涛及中共专制暴政枉法杀害英雄义士杨佳!
·杨佳精神不朽 抗暴当走退党之路
·岂能将英雄义士杨佳与希特勒、哈尔曼、唐永明相提并论?!
·杨佳案7名涉案警察证人和杨佳的母亲必须出庭作证
·郭国汀预言死刑将造就更多杨佳
·杨佳略传六则一揽
·悼颂杨佳
·杨佳依自然法无罪而且是个值得国人敬重的英雄!
·郭国汀再谈杨佳案的辩护
·郭国汀律师的臭文
·正义、尊严、公道与犯罪----杨佳有罪吗?
·敬请关注声援失踪的律师英雄张鉴康
·强烈谴责中共胡氏当局非法剥夺人权律师张鉴康的执业权
·坚决支持李国涛先生的义举,反对极权专制独裁政治!
·严正责令胡锦涛及中共当局——立即无条件释放民运志士李国涛!
·强烈谴责中共恶意迫害自由战士杨天水、许万平/郭国汀
·强烈谴责中共流氓暴政政治迫害冯正虎先生
·历史耻辱柱上的中国法官
·中国律师受迫害的根源何在?-—声援支持高智晟律师
·良知律师朱久虎被刑拘突显中国司法制度的流氓化/郭国汀
·闻小乔遭警方驱逐毒打有感
·强烈谴责中共专制暴政纵容黑社会暴力侵袭郭飞雄先生的暴行!
·敬请各界朋友们关注声援支持正在为全民族承受无边苦难的英雄郭飞雄
·郭国汀敦促胡锦涛立即无条件释放人权英雄郭飞雄、高智晟的公开函
·强烈谴责上海市当局非法拘禁李剑虹 郭国汀
·专制流氓暴政本质的再暴露——强烈谴责中共流氓黑社会企图暗杀高智晟律师
·严正责令胡锦涛立即无条件释放朱宇飙律师!
·评论严正责令胡锦涛立即无条件释放朱宇飙律师!
·强烈谴责中共专制暴政迫害人权律师杨在新!
·强烈谴责胡氏专制暴政滥施淫威迫害当代中国最高贵的人吕耿松
·中共专制暴政再次公然指鹿为马!——我为陈树庆先生抗辩
·强烈谴责中共流氓专制暴政悍然施暴人权律师李和平!
·谁是精神病?!敬请关注自由思想者贺伟华先生
·郭国汀敬请全球华人关注自由思想者贺伟华
·强烈谴责胡氏专制暴政对中国知识分子的政治迫害!---我为荆楚抗辩
·严正警告胡锦涛:立即无条件释放高智晟律师!
·郭国汀谈胡佳案
·恶法不除,国无宁日/郭国汀
·严正学先生何罪之有!
·中国涉外案件没有一起获得执行 郭国汀
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
加拿大著名人权律师安世立支持声援全球绝食抗暴的声明

   加拿大著名人权律师安世立支持声援全球绝食抗暴的声明
   Statement in Support of Gao Zhisheng and World Wide Hunger Strike by Lawyers
   I wish to add my voice to those of lawyers and human rights organizations throughout the world in condemning the shocking and unceasing affronts to human rights and the rule of law perpetrated by the Government of China against lawyers of conscience.
   
   

   China is obligated both by its own laws, which the Government of China routinely ignores, and by international treaties and conventions binding China both as a signatory and also as a member state of the United Nations, to protect lawyers and ensure they are free to carry out their professional duties as advocates for their clients. The Chinese government has made a cynical mockery of all its obligations to lawyers and human rights advocates, in total violation of its obligations under both Chinese and International Law.
   
   
   The Chinese government today is arguably the worst violator of human rights on this planet, in partnership with western corporations such as Microsoft, Nortel, Yahoo, Cisco and Google. Many western governments, with an eye on their “market share” in China, have obsequiously fawned at the feet of the Chinese dictators and willingly assisted those dictators in promoting their claims that the human rights situation in China has never been better.
   
   
   
   The last Prime Minister of Canada, Paul Martin, shamelessly congratulated the Beijing regime on its alleged progress in promoting human rights and implementing the “rule of law”, in the face of overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that the Beijing dictators are crushing human rights as never before and that they are ruthlessly determined to prevent the rule of law at any cost. Indeed, both Paul Martin and Jean Chretien before him prattled on incessantly about the “great progress” in Chinese human rights under the Beijing dictatorship even as Beijing was implementing a policy of full scale genocide against practitioners of Falun Gong.
   
   
   The first prominent human rights lawyer in China was Guo Guoting. His unbelievable courage in risking his own life and standing up to the brutal government of China has inspired a number of other honest lawyers throughout China to stand up for the rule of law, for human rights, for freedom of religion and political belief, against the Beijing regime. Today, Gao Zhisheng leads the fight inside China, while Guo Guoting, now resident in Canada, coordinates the international effort of lawyers everywhere to support their beleaguered and persecuted colleagues in China.
   
   
   Gao Zhisheng, like Guo Guoting, is a man with a level of courage probably beyond the comprehension of anyone not intimately familiar with the brutality and mendacity of the Beijing regime and the Chinese Communist Party. The Beijing regime has prevented him from practising his profession and has recently attempted to kill him. Indeed, were it not for the international attention and support he has received, the Chinese government would have succeeded in murdering him already.
   
   
   Gao Zhisheng spoke out on behalf of Falun Gong practitioners who are denied by the Chinese government their constitutional right to legal defence. He wrote an open letter to President Hu Jintao, specifically addressing the fact that these practitioners are citizens of China and must therefore have the same right to legal defence as all other Chinese citizens (which in practice is of little assistance to any citizen in any case). Mr. Gao also met in December with the United Nations emissary to China who had been sent to investigate reports of torture and other human rights abuses.
   
   
   Shortly thereafter, the Chinese authorities confiscated Mr. Gao’s licence to practise law, and closed down his law office, preventing the other ten lawyers in Mr. Gao’s office from practising their profession. The transparently false justification for these actions was that Mr. Gao had failed to report a change of address when renewing the registration of his law office!
   
   
   Since that time, several other courageous human rights lawyers from all over China have been arrested, incarcerated, harassed, threatened, and in some cases beaten, simply for discharging their professional duties as lawyers. Moreover, a recent attempt was made on Gao Zhisheng’s life, an attempt almost certainly the work of the Chinese police and military.
   
   
   Mr. Gao has now initiated a protest campaign of rotating hunger strikes by lawyers in several cities of China and Ms Sheng Xue has called on lawyers throughout the world to join this movement.
   
   
   We support Mr. Gao. We support the world wide hunger strike by lawyers of conscience. We support the demand that the Chinese government be held to at least minimum international standards of decency and civilization. And we call upon the new Government of Canada to reverse the last government’s shameful complicity in the crimes of the Beijing regime. We hope that the new Canadian government will express its support for Gao Zhisheng, for the world wide hunger strike by lawyers of conscience, and for the demand that Beijing recognize the rule of law and respect at least the minimal international norms of human rights and basic decency.
   
   Clive Ansley
   

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场

;   “保险财产的所有人或其他对其有利益或有责任的当事人由于海上风险的原因对第三方产生的任何责任。”
   在《海上保险法》第74条“对第三方责任”的标题下规定:
   “Where the assured has effected an insurance in express terms against any liability to a third party, the measure of indemnify, subject to any express provision in the policy, is the amount paid or payable by him to such third party in respect of such liability”.
    “被保险人已通过明示条款对第三方的任何责任进行投保,根据保险单上明示条款的规定,获得补偿的数额是其就这一责任向第三方支付或应支付的数额。”
    如果需要权威论点的话,这些法定条款对今天的包括碰撞责任在内的第三方责任保险便是权威。
   协会碰撞责任条款(Institute Collision Liability Clause)
   若未考查其历史,碰撞责任条款似乎是一个相当混杂的条款,让我们回到条款本身,即1983年10月1日协会船舶定期保险条款第8条。虽然其基本特点保持未变,该条款的格式要比船舶碰撞条款清晰和简单的多,保险人不想修改或改变原先船舶碰撞条款的适用范围和含义。四分之三(赔偿责任)的碰撞责任条款全文如下:
   8.1 The underwriters agree to indemnify the Assured for three-fourths of any sum or sums paid by the Assured to any other person or persons by reason of the Assured becoming legally liable by way of damages for
   8.1.1 loss of or damage to any other vessel or property on any other vessel
   8.1.2 delay to or loss of use of any such other vessel or property thereon
   8.1.3 general average of, salvage of , or salvage under contract of, any such other vessel or property thereon,
    where such payment by the Assured is in consequence of the Vessel hereby insured coming into collision with any other vessel.
   8.2 The indemnity provided by this Clause 8 shall be in addition to the indemnity provided by the other terms and conditions of this insurance and shall be subject to the following provisions:
   8.2.1 Where the insured Vessel is in collision with another vessel and both vessels are to blame, then, unless the liability of one or both vessels becomes limited by law, the indemnity under this Clause 8 shall be calculated on the principle of cross-liabilities as if the respective Owners had been compelled to pay to each other such proportion of each other’s damages as may have been properly allowed in ascertaining the balance or sum payable by or to the Assured in consequence of the collision.

[上一页][目前是第2页][下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场