現場不只在街頭：一個港人研究者的倡議重建

The Site Is Not Only on the Street: A Hong Kong Researcher’s Reconstruction of Advocacy

本文以一名離散港人研究者的第一人稱視角，回顧自2014年雨傘運動至2026年《保護關鍵基礎設施（電腦系統）條例》生效之間，香港代議政治與公民社會被逐格收緊的過程，並反思當街頭不再可能成為現場時，倡議工作該如何重建。作者從2016年立法會的政治光譜談起，歷經DQ（disqualification，簡稱DQ）風潮、2019年區議會選舉、《港區國安法》與2024年《維護國家安全條例》，指出香港的人權侵害已從「事件」轉變為「環境」，並透過刑事門檻內移、行政與技術監控擴張，以及法律以外的合規壓力等三個層次，被「合法地」嵌入日常治理。文章接著提出「條文、田野、書桌」三個替代性現場：在條文中比對、翻譯、建檔被刪除的法律與報告。在台北以「昨日台灣，今日香港」的鏡像，把白色恐怖經驗與當代香港對讀，並結合GoLaxy等案例觀察中華人民共和國資訊戰的模板化。在東京的書桌上，為日本與其他亞太讀者重建語境，使香港經驗成為區域民主防衛的政策資源。作者主張，公民社會韌性是平時的工程而非危機時的應急工具，呼籲台、日及國際社會將香港已經付出的代價，轉化為下一個十年的制度準備。

From the first-person perspective of a diasporic Hong Kong researcher, this essay traces how representative politics and civil society in Hong Kong have been gradually tightened and restricted, step by step, from the 2014 Umbrella Movement through the disqualification of legislators, the 2020 National Security Law, the 2024 Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, and the 2026 Protection of Critical Infrastructures (Computer Systems) Ordinance. The author argues that human rights violations in Hong Kong have shifted from discrete“events”to an entrenched“environment,”embedded in everyday governance through three compounding layers: the inward shift of criminal thresholds regulating speech and intent; the expansion of administrative and technical surveillance under the guise of cybersecurity and data protection; and extra-legal compliance pressures that induce self-censorship without explicit prohibitions.
With street-level mobilization foreclosed, the essay proposes three alternative sites of advocacy: engagement with legal texts, transnational fieldwork, and desk-based analysis. Methodologically, it compares, translates, and archives legal texts and removed government records; conducts comparative studies between White Terror-era Taiwan and contemporary Hong Kong; and examines PRC information warfare templates across the region through case studies such as the leaked GoLaxy documents and the Takaichi narrative networks. It also reconstructs the legal, political, and cultural context so that Japanese, Taiwanese, and other Indo-Pacific readers can interpret Hong Kong’s experience as actionable policy intelligence rather than transient news.
The essay concludes by calling for civil society resilience to be treated as everyday infrastructure cultivated in times of peace, rather than emergency equipment improvised in moments of crisis.