紐時賞析／英國法律 成俄國等獨裁國追殺外逃政敵工具

The Power of Money: How Autocrats Use London to Strike Foes Worldwide

英國法律 成俄國等獨裁國追殺外逃政敵工具

Olena Tyshchenko, a lawyer based in Britain, was facing years in a crowded Russian prison cell when a chance at freedom came via an unexpected source.

住在英國的律師奧萊娜．特先科在擁擠的俄羅斯牢房待了數年後，突然一個意想不到的來源帶來了重獲自由的機會。

An English lawyer named Chris Hardman, a partner at Hogan Lovells, one of the biggest law firms in the world, flew into Moscow while his firm helped draft a tantalizing offer: Tyshchenko could be freed if she provided information that could be used to help his client in a sprawling web of litigation in London.

一位名叫克里斯．哈德曼的英國律師來到莫斯科。他是世界上最大律師事務所之一霍金路偉合夥人，他的律師行幫忙起草了一份誘人提議：若特先科提供的資訊可被用在倫敦一個訴訟案中幫助他當事人，她就能獲釋。

The twist is that Tyshchenko was one of the lawyers on the other side. To win her freedom, she would have to turn on her client. It was a ruthless exchange. But the Moscow prison had been ruthless, too, and she reluctantly agreed. In a later interview, she said what seemed “most abnormal” was that lawyers opposing her in a trial in London could play a role in her fate in Russia.

問題是，特先科是另一方的律師之一。為了贏得自由，她必須背叛她的當事人。這是一場無情的交換，但莫斯科的監獄也是殘酷無情的，於是她勉強同意了。在後來受訪時，她說，看起來「最不正常」的是，在倫敦審判中她的對手律師，竟能影響她在俄羅斯的命運。

“They are extremely aggressive,” she added.

她說：「他們極度好鬥。」

A Moscow prison. A London courtroom. One is part of a Russian legal system widely considered corrupt and subordinate to the Kremlin. The other is a symbol of an English legal system respected around the world. Yet after Hardman returned to London, an English judge would accept into the case the evidence obtained from the Moscow prison.

一邊是莫斯科監獄，一邊是倫敦法庭。一個是幾乎被公認聽命於克里姆林宮的俄羅斯腐敗法律體系一部分，一個則是在全世界受尊敬的英國法律體系象徵。然而，在哈德曼回倫敦後，一位英國法官同意，把從莫斯科監獄獲得的證據加入案件。

The episode is a vivid illustration of how the brutal politics of authoritarian countries like Russia and Kazakhstan have spilled into England’s legal system, with lawyers and private investigators in London raking in huge fees and engaging in questionable tactics in the service of autocratic foreign governments.

這一事件生動地說明了，俄羅斯和哈薩克等獨裁國家的殘暴政治是如何滲透英國法律體系，倫敦的律師和私人調查員收取巨額費用，採取可疑的策略為專制的外國政府服務。

An investigation by The New York Times and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism — involving a review of hundreds of pages of case documents, leaked records and more than 80 interviews with insiders, experts and witnesses — reveals how London’s courts are being used by autocrats to wage legal warfare against people who have fled their countries after falling out of favor over politics or money.

紐約時報和新聞調查局進行一項調查，查閱數百頁案件文件、外洩紀錄，以及採訪內部人士、專家和證人80多次，揭露倫敦法院是如何被獨裁者利用，對那些在政治或金錢上失勢而逃離自己國家的人發動法律戰。

Four out of the past six years, litigants from Russia and Kazakhstan have been involved in more civil cases in England than have any other foreigners. Authoritarian governments or related state entities are often pitted against wealthy tycoons who have fallen from favor and fled. Neither side elicits much pity — but both pay generous legal fees.

過去六年裡有四年，來自俄羅斯和哈薩克的訴訟當事人，在英國捲入的民事案件比其他任何外國人都多。獨裁政府或相關的國家實體，經常跟失寵而逃亡的富有大亨對立。任何一方都不會引起多少同情，但都支付了豐厚的律師費。

Filing litigation in London can bring legitimacy for claims by autocratic governments, whose own legal systems are so tainted that their decisions carry little weight outside their borders. 

在倫敦提起訴訟，可為獨裁政府帶來合法性，這些政府自身的法律體系已遭汙染，以致其判決在境外幾無公信力。

(Andrew Higgins, Jane Bradley, Isobel Koshiw and Franz Wild) 譯／陳韋廷

說文解字看新聞

【陳韋廷】

英國司法正遭國外獨裁政府利用，外國獨裁者手握銀彈將黑手伸入英國法律體系，進行滲透與發起訴訟戰來跨國追殺敵人，如同電影般的情節真實上演，autocrat即指「獨裁者」，跟authoritarian意思相近，但後者在文中當形容詞用，意思同於autocratic，三者均常見於國際政治類新聞英文。

Litigation在文中譯作「訴訟案」，為法律用語，跟lawsuit一樣有「訴訟」之意，但litigation常指訴訟進行的程序，動詞litigate，litigant則指「訴訟當事人」，即原告與被告。

動詞片語wage legal warfare against sb意指「對某人發起法律戰」，同段片語fall out of favor則跟倒數第二段片語fall from favor同義，即lose favor（失寵、失勢）。末段的carry little weight表示「沒什麼分量」，指獨裁國家的司法判決很少被外國認可。