July 1, 2022, marks the 25th anniversary of Hong Kong's return to the motherland. On this day of national celebration, Hong Kong singer Jacky Cheung also sent a video blessing. It was originally a pretty decent scene, but attentive netizens discovered that Jacky Cheung did not us

is quite difficult to pronounce, because I haven't found a good way to express it.

July 1, 2022, marks the 25th anniversary of Hong Kong's return to the motherland. On this day of national celebration, Hong Kong singer Jacky Cheung also sent a video blessing. It was originally a quite satisfactory scene, but attentive netizens discovered that Jacky Cheung did not use words such as "return" and "motherland" in the video. Then some people questioned that he was not "patriotic" enough, and the video was subsequently removed from the official channel delete.

Jacky Cheung’s fans are all confused: I never thought in my life that Jacky Cheung would be questioned as being unpatriotic!

As a result, someone edited Jacky Cheung’s past patriotic actions and remarks to prove his innocence. In that video, Jacky Cheung participated in Hong Kong's return celebration party and other theme parties many times, took the lead in singing the national anthem at the National Day party, participated in the 2008 Beijing Olympics torch relay, and expressed patriotic remarks on various occasions... ...

video is a full 13 minutes long, and fans are constantly adding new material below. "Jacky Cheung really just has 'I am Chinese and I love China' engraved on his forehead."

This naturally triggered a heated debate among netizens: How to prove that your remarks are patriotic?

On the one hand, we know that the Constitution stipulates that citizens have the right to speak freely, and citizens have freedom of speech. Article 35 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China states that citizens of the People's Republic of China have the freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, procession, and demonstration. Freedom of speech is a basic human right stipulated in the Chinese Constitution. In China, citizens can freely express their opinions and wishes and publish research and creative results within the scope permitted by the constitution and law. With the development of the economy and society, the means for the public to realize freedom of speech are becoming increasingly abundant, their needs for obtaining information are better met, the space for freedom of speech continues to expand, and the right to freedom of expression continues to develop.

On the other hand, freedom of speech has legal boundaries. Article 51 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China stipulates that when citizens of the People's Republic of China exercise their freedoms and rights, they may not harm the interests of the state, society, or the collective, or the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens. Article 52: Citizens of the People's Republic of China have the obligation to safeguard the unity of the country and the unity of all ethnic groups in the country.

On the other hand, according to the law of proof that everything is impossible, it cannot be concluded that a person lacks something just because he has not said anything. The basic principle of burden of proof is whoever claims the claim shall provide evidence. According to the provisions of the "Interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law": The People's Court shall determine the burden of proof in accordance with the following principles, except where otherwise provided by law: The party claiming the existence of a legal relationship shall bear responsibility for the basic facts that gave rise to the legal relationship. Burden of proof. In other words, if you claim that someone is not patriotic, you must bear the burden of proof for the basic fact that he is not patriotic. You cannot prove that he is not patriotic just because he did not say "patriotic" in a speech.

This kind of logic is very funny. If you didn't say "love mom" when you called your mom, does that mean you don't love your mom?

No one should be punished for his thoughts. The basic meaning of this Roman law motto is that thoughts are free, and the state cannot use anyone’s thoughts as the object of punishment; conversely, only behavior can constitute a crime. The object of criminal punishment.

On December 24, 1841, Kaiser Wilhelm IV promulgated the "new" censorship order. The young Marx saw through the hypocrisy of this "new" censorship order with his sharp political vision at a glance, and in 1842 Between January and February, he wrote "Comment on Prussia's Recent Censorship Order", which pointedly exposed the true intention of the Prussian autocratic government. In April 1842, Marx wrote another article, "The Debate on the Freedom of the Press and the Publication of the Minutes of Estate Meetings," which provided an in-depth analysis of the relationship between law and freedom. Marx believed that such laws, which punished ideas rather than actions, were actually “laws of terrorism,” “a public endorsement of illegal behavior."(The Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Volume 1, pp. 16-17) The real law can only regulate people's external behavior. "For the law, apart from my behavior, I am the fundamental nonexistent. "For this reason, Marx pointed out: "Law is an affirmative, clear, and universal norm. In these norms, the existence of freedom is universal, theoretical, and does not depend on the willfulness of individual people. The Code is the Bible of people's freedom. ”

Only when the criminal’s internal dangerous character is manifested in external behavior, can the criminal’s internal dangerous character be recognized and punished. Therefore, behavior can only represent the dangerous character. And slander is the dissatisfaction or complaint in the heart. , words that have not been spoken out, or are afraid to be spoken out. Therefore, even though there are thousands of slanders, they have not constituted any legal facts, and there is no evidence, so Jacky Cheung cannot be guilty. It is inconsistent with legal logic and reasoning to assume that he is not something, is against something, or lacks something without mentioning anything in his remarks.

Monday, July 4, 2022