路透社(Reuters 讀音是"roiter"不是"rooters")這篇報導嚇死人: Exclusive: Hong Kong judges see risks in proposed extradition changes, 中文媒體廣泛引用(請隨連結自己看), 其中幾段 

HONG KONG (Reuters) - Some Hong Kong judges fear they are being put on a collision course with Beijing as the special administrative region’s government pushes for sweeping legal changes that would for the first time allow fugitives captured in Hong Kong to be sent to mainland China for trial. 

Three senior judges and 12 leading commercial and criminal lawyers say the changes, called the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance amendment bill, mark one of the starkest challenges to Hong Kong’s legal system and are increasingly troubling its business, political and diplomatic communities. 

It is the first time judges - who by convention don’t comment on political or legislative matters - have discussed the issue publicly.

...... 

12位資深律師講甚麼沒有關係, 前些時一班大律師公會主席都發了聲。使人憂慮的是3位資深法官的言論, 法官的擔心有理, 但在位而發表意見就無理, 也違反《法官行為指引》(Guide to Judicial Conduct)的精神。這種精神是甚麼? 一言以蔽之: Impartiality(彰顯公正)。該指引並無講明法官不可接受訪問, 但對社會熱議的政治/法律議題發言, 予人強烈欠缺公正的觀感, 不在於看法本身是否中肯, 而在於根本不應表態。法官唯一可就法律表態的場合是在法庭、在判決時的裁決。匿名受訪比具名更差, 若是具名, 在審理涉及有關課題的案件時可以避席, 匿名就會引起猜測, 不知有份裁決的法官中是否有3位其中一位。不論具名匿名都會被爭論者引述而捲入論爭之中。法律論爭最終由法官裁決, 未裁決前已涉事其中, 還可怎樣展示司法獨立公正? 法官向傳媒交心是不當的做法, 又可以被炒作為法官勾結外國勢力了。To strike the balance, 是否要找幾個法官接受人民日報訪問呢? 

劉姓商人也發聲明交心, 身在曹營心在漢, 出走楓葉國, 卻一片丹心愛國愛港, 以身作則, 放棄對逃犯條例的司法覆核, 以平息社會爭端, 我看得潸然淚下, 巧感動啊! 不如做戲做全套, 也做個好榜樣給陳同佳看, 去澳門投案好嗎?