17 May 2025獨媒#6800
國際不再恐同日 團體銅鑼灣辦性別多元活動
Today (May 17) is the International Day Against Homophobia. Last year, Hong Kong LGBTQ organisation “Gay Harmony” held a Pride Month market at iSQUARE, but the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department said it had not obtained a temporary public place licence or a place of public entertainment licence, and the event was ultimately cancelled. A year later, “Gay Harmony” today joined forces with several gender diversity organisations to set up stalls and exhibitions around East Point Road and George Street in Causeway Bay, hoping to raise public awareness of gender diversity issues. Francis, the founder of “Gay Harmony”, said the group had applied to and received approval from the Lands Department for this event. He said last year’s cancellation was “also because we ourselves were not sensitive enough”. The group will hold an event at The Mills in Tsuen Wan in June and is applying to the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department for a licence.
今日（5月17日）是國際不再恐同日，去年香港同志組織「大同」（Gay Harmony）iSQUARE舉辦同志驕傲月市集，惟食環署指未獲臨時公眾場所牌或娛樂場所牌照，最終活動取消告吹。事隔一年，「大同」今日聯同多個性別多元組織，在銅鑼灣東角道及紀利佐治街一帶設攤位及展覽，冀大眾關注性別多元議題。「大同」創辦人Francis表示，今次活動向地政總署申請並獲批，去年活動遭取消「都係衰自己唔夠敏感」，他們6月會到荃灣南豐紗廠舉辦活動，正向食環署申請牌照。
28 Apr 2025獨媒#6736
質疑改身分證性別新政策損私隱權兼構成歧視 跨男謝浩霖申司法覆核求推翻
The Court of Final Appeal ruled two years ago that the Immigration Department’s policy requiring transgender people to undergo complete gender reassignment surgery before changing the gender marker on their identity cards was unconstitutional. In early April last year, the department revised the policy. People who have not undergone complete gender reassignment surgery may apply to change the gender marker on their identity cards if they have removed their breasts, or their penis and testicles, but must make a statutory declaration undertaking to continue hormone treatment, submit blood-test reports to check hormone levels when requested by the authorities, and notify the Registration of Persons Office within 30 days of any change to their correspondence address or telephone number. Tse Henry Edward, one of the transgender people who won the case and chair of the Hong Kong Transgender Equality Association, filed an application for judicial review in the High Court last Thursday (the 24th), challenging the new policy as infringing his right to privacy and constituting sex discrimination. He also argued that Hong Kong lacks a legally recognised route for gender transition, meaning that his male identity remains uncertain, in breach of the right to privacy and private life protected by Article 14 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. He asked the court to rule that the new policy was unconstitutional and order its withdrawal.
終審法院前年裁定，入境處要求跨性別人士須完成完整性別重置手術，才能更改身分證性別的政策違憲。入境處去年4月初修訂政策，未完成完整性別重置手術的人士，若果已移除乳房，或移除陽具和睪丸的話，須作出法定聲明，包括承諾會繼續接受荷爾蒙治療、在當局要求下提交血液測試報告以檢查荷爾蒙水平，以及若果通訊地址和電話有任何更改，須在30日內通知人事登記處，方可申請更改身分證性別。其中一名勝訴的跨性別人士、香港跨性別平權協會主席謝浩霖上周四（24日）入稟高院提請司法覆核，質疑新政策損害他的私隱權及構成性別歧視。他亦質疑本港缺乏法律上認可性別轉換的途徑，意味他的男性身份具不確定性，違反《香港人權法案》第14條所保障的私隱權和私生活權利。謝要求法庭裁定新政策違憲及下令撤銷。
22 Jan 2025集誌社#4453
夬兒藝術展｜缺臂藝術家與友人辦殘疾、精神障礙人士藝術展 「大家可以去『示弱』」
Wearing a dark green checked patient uniform, artist Xu Zhengyi (Jade) used fluorescent green paint at the exhibition venue to draw a relationship map for words scattered across the floor, without saying a word.
“Discrimination” pointed to “queer”, “animality”, “disability” and “poverty”.
“Human” equalled “animal”, which equalled “beast”.
These were insights reached by 27-year-old Jade through living and interacting with disabled and able-bodied people.
The exhibition in which Jade took part, titled “Between”, was an extension of the month-long “Crip Art Residency 2.0” (Crip Art Residency).
Five artists—including people with mental illnesses, people in recovery, people with hearing impairments and two able-bodied people—lived together for a month in Sai Kung during November and December last year, before exhibiting the artworks created during the residency at an art space in Jordan.
身穿墨綠色格仔病人服藝術家許正宜（Jade），用瑩光綠色的顏料在展覽場上，一言不發地為散落地面的字詞畫下關係圖。
「歧視」指向「酷兒」、「獸性」、「殘疾」和「窮」。
「人類」等於「動物」等於「畜牲」。
這是 27 歲的 Jade 與殘疾人士和健全人士同住交流下得出的感悟。
Jade 參加的展覽，名為「間」，是為期一個月「夬兒藝術駐留計劃 2.0 」(Crip Art Residency) 的延伸。
五位藝術家，包括精神病患、復康者、聽障人士和兩名健全人士，於去年 11 月及 12 月期間，在西貢共同生活一個月，然後在佐敦的藝術空間展出駐留期間的藝術創作。
26 Nov 2024法庭線#4292
房屋政策排除同志被裁違憲 房委會終極敗訴 終院：異性配偶從沒獨享申請公屋、居屋權利
Two same-sex spouses sought judicial reviews after the Housing Authority refused to recognise their status as family members, preventing them from applying for public rental housing and living in Home Ownership Scheme flats. In a separate case, a gay man sought judicial review because he feared that, if he died intestate, his husband would be unable to inherit his property under the Intestates’ Estates Ordinance. The three cases had earlier been decided in their favour. On Tuesday (the 26th), the Court of Final Appeal unanimously dismissed the Government’s appeal, with all five judges ordering it to pay the legal costs. The same-sex couples and spouses therefore retained their victories in all three cases.
Regarding housing policy, the judgment said allowing same-sex spouses married overseas to apply for public rental housing and Home Ownership Scheme flats would not prejudice the rights of opposite-sex couples, and that opposite-sex spouses had never had an exclusive right to apply for public rental housing or Home Ownership Scheme flats. In response to the Housing Authority’s argument that the existing policy could encourage childbirth, the court said the Authority’s primary objective should be to address the housing needs of low-income families, while the policy itself did not distinguish between opposite-sex spouses who had or had not had children. The judges held that preventing same-sex spouses married overseas from sharing family life in public rental housing or Home Ownership Scheme flats deprived same-sex spouses facing housing difficulties of the right to live under the same roof.
One of the applicants in the same-sex cases was originally Wu Hon-lam. After his death, his husband Yik Ho Li took over the case. Li thanked the court on Facebook for affirming his late husband’s contribution to equal rights for gay people. Nick Infinger, an applicant in the public housing case, described the ruling as “a way of giving myself an answer.”
兩名同性配偶因房委會拒絕承認其家庭成員身分，未能申請公屋及入住居屋，提出司法覆核。另外，男同志因擔心在無立遺囑下離世，丈夫無法按《無遺囑者遺產條例》繼承財產，提出司法覆核，3 案早前獲判勝訴。政府上訴至終審法院，周二（26 日）被終院 5 名法官一致駁回，兼須付訟費，同志一方於 3 案維持勝訴。
針對房屋政策，判詞指，允許海外已婚同性伴侶申請公屋、居屋，並不損害異性夫婦的權利，而異性配偶亦從來沒有獨享申請公屋、居屋權利。至於房委會指現行政策可鼓勵生育，法庭反駁，房委會政策的首要目標，應該是解決低收入家庭的住屋需要，而政策本身亦沒區分異性配偶有否生育。法官認為，海外已婚同性配偶不能在公屋或居屋中共享家庭生活，是剝奪了有住屋困難的同性配偶，在同一屋簷下生活的權利。
同志方其中一名申請人原為吳翰林，他離世後由丈夫李亦豪接手。李於 FB 感激法庭肯定亡夫同志平權的付出；公屋案申請人 Nick Infinger 則形容裁決「算係畀自己一個交代」。
26 Nov 2024法庭線#4295
房屋政策、遺產條例案政府終極敗訴 申請人致亡夫：希望我沒有辜負了你的心血
Two same-sex spouses sought judicial reviews after the Housing Authority refused to recognise them as family members, preventing them from applying for public rental housing and moving into Home Ownership Scheme flats. In a separate case, a gay man sought judicial review over concerns that, if he died intestate, his husband would be unable to inherit his property under the Intestate’s Estates Ordinance. The applicants had earlier won all three cases. The government appealed to the Court of Final Appeal, which unanimously dismissed the appeals on Tuesday (26th), upholding the applicants’ victories in all three cases.
One of the applicants in the same-sex rights cases was originally Ng Hon-lam. After his death, his husband Yik Ho Li took over the case. Lee thanked the court on Facebook for affirming the hardships endured by his late husband and “affirming your contribution to equal rights for LGBT people”. Nick Infinger, an applicant in the public housing case, said he had fought for equal rights for many years and described the ruling as “some small result, at least giving myself an answer”.
A government spokesperson and the Housing Authority said they respected the Court of Final Appeal’s judgment. They would study the judgment seriously and, depending on the circumstances, seek legal advice before taking follow-up action.
兩名同性配偶因房委會拒絕承認其家庭成員身分，未能申請公屋及入住居屋，提出司法覆核。另外，男同志因擔心在無立遺囑下離世，丈夫無法按《無遺囑者遺產條例》繼承財產，提出司法覆核，3 案早前獲判勝訴。政府上訴至終審法院，周二（26 日）被終院一致駁回，同志一方於 3 案維持勝訴。
同志一方申請人之一原為吳翰林，他離世後由丈夫李亦豪接手。李於 FB 感激法庭肯定亡夫的苦，「肯定你對同志平權的付出」。公屋案申請人 Nick Infinger 則形容自己爭取平權多年，今次裁決「叫做有少少成果，算係畀自己一個交代」。
政府發言人及房委會表示，尊重終審法院的判決，會認真研究法庭判決，再按情況徵詢法律意見，以作出跟進行動。
26 Nov 2024法庭線#4296
遺產條例排除同志被裁違憲 政府終極敗訴 終院指條例下權利非建基於贍養責任
Two same-sex spouses sought judicial review after the Housing Authority refused to recognise them as family members, preventing them from applying for public rental housing and moving into Home Ownership Scheme flats. Separately, a gay man sought judicial review because he feared that, if he died without making a will, his husband would be unable to inherit his property under the Intestates’ Estates Ordinance. The three cases had earlier been decided in their favour. On Tuesday (26th), the Court of Final Appeal unanimously dismissed the Government’s appeal by a five-judge panel and ordered it to pay the legal costs, leaving the LGBT applicants successful in all three cases.
Regarding the Intestates’ Estates Ordinance, the judgment said same-sex couples married overseas have relationships of equal closeness to those of heterosexual couples. The ordinance in question aims to distribute a deceased person’s property among relatives, including the deceased’s “intimate human relationships”, and is not dependent on marital status. Same-sex spouses can therefore be beneficiaries.
In response to the Government’s argument that only married heterosexual people have a “duty of maintenance during life”, the Court of Final Appeal said that the rights under the ordinance are not based on such a duty. It also said the ordinance’s definition of “valid marriage” differs from those adopted in other marriage ordinances, and reiterated that the legislature had no sufficient reason to restrict beneficiary spouses to people married under the Marriage Ordinance.
One of the LGBT applicants was originally Ng Hon-lam. After Ng died in 2020, his husband Yik Ho Li took over the case. Lee wrote on Facebook: “Grateful that the court recognised your suffering and recognised your contribution to LGBT equality.”
兩名同性配偶因房委會拒絕承認其家庭成員身分，未能申請公屋及入住居屋，提出司法覆核。另外，男同志因擔心在無立遺囑下離世，丈夫無法按《無遺囑者遺產條例》繼承財產，提出司法覆核，3 案早前獲判勝訴。政府上訴至終審法院，周二（26 日）被終院 5 名法官一致駁回，兼須付訟費，同志一方於 3 案維持勝訴。
針對《遺產條例》，判詞指，海外結婚的同性伴侶與異性夫婦一樣，具有同等密切的關係。而涉案《遺產條例》目的是將死者財產分配予親屬，包括死者的「親密人際關係」，非取決於婚姻狀況，因此同性配偶可成為受益人。
就政府一方指，只有異性已婚人士有「生前贍養責任」。終院反駁，條例下的權利非建基於贍養責任，又指《遺產條例》對「有效婚姻」一詞定義，與其他婚姻條例採用的定義有別，重申立法機關沒充分理由，限制受益配偶必須是根據《婚姻條例》結婚的人。
同志一方其中一名申請人原為吳翰林，吳於 2020 年離世後，由丈夫李亦豪接手。李於 FB 表示：「感激法庭肯定你的苦，肯定你對同志平權的付出」
26 Oct 2024法庭線#4181
終院裁須設同性伴侶承認框架 距離限期不足1年 同志團體在想甚麼？
Shum Tsz-kit, a member of Rainbow Action and former convenor of the Civil Human Rights Front, earlier brought a final appeal over Hong Kong law’s failure to recognise same-sex relationships. He won the appeal in part at the Court of Final Appeal last September, when the court ruled that the Government’s failure to recognise same-sex relationships violated the Hong Kong Bill of Rights and required the Government to establish an alternative legal framework within two years to meet their basic social needs and provide legal recognition of their status.
With less than a year remaining before the deadline, no specific legislative framework has yet emerged. The Policy Address released in the middle of the month also made no mention of the issue, prompting disappointment from some LGBT groups. In response to enquiries from The Witness, the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau said the Government was conducting detailed studies and drawing up implementation arrangements in different areas covered by the court’s ruling. Secretary Erick Tsang said in response to a Legislative Council member’s question in May that, given the complexity and wide-ranging nature of the issue, the bureau was conducting detailed studies with the relevant policy bureaux and would consult the Legislative Council at an appropriate time.
The Witness interviewed LGBT groups and lawyers. Several described the Court of Final Appeal’s ruling as meaning that the Government must recognise same-sex relationships comprehensively, or that it could prompt Hong Kong to establish civil unions for same-sex couples. They said it was undoubtedly a historic step in the city’s progress towards LGBT equality, while some groups urged the Government to use the opportunity to promote same-sex marriage. Others, however, noted that the judgment left room for the executive authorities to determine the details. What form the final framework will take and whether its protection will be comprehensive remain unknown.
「彩虹行動」成員、前民陣召集人岑子杰，早前就香港法律不承認同性伴侶關係提終極上訴，去年 9 月獲終審法院裁定部分勝訴，指政府不承認同性伴侶關係，違反《人權法案》，要求港府於兩年內訂立替代法律框架，以滿足他們的基本社會需求及獲取合法身分認同。
距離限期不足一年時間，暫未見具體立法框架，月中公布的《施政報告》亦未有著墨，有同志團體對此表示失望。政制及內地事務局回覆《法庭線》查詢時指，政府正按法院裁決，就有關議題所涉及的不同範疇進行詳細研究及制定落實安排。局長曾國衞今年 5 月則曾回覆立法會議員提問指，鑑於議題複雜且牽涉廣泛，局方正與相關政策局進行詳細研究，會適時徵詢立法會。
《法庭線》訪問了同志團體及律師，多人形容，終院判決意味政府須整全地承認同性伴侶關係，或促使香港訂立同性伴侶民事結合，對本港同志平權進程無疑是歷史性一步，更有團體倡政府趁機推動同婚；但亦有人關注，法院判詞留下空間，具體細節由行政當局釐定，最終框架將以何種形態出現、保障是否全面，仍屬未知之數。
8 Oct 2024法庭線#4130
遺產條例排除同志被裁違憲 政府終極上訴指正研替代框架不宜「斬件式」改定義
A gay man, concerned that his husband would be unable to inherit his property if he died without making a will, sought a judicial review and won. The government’s appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, and it then applied to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. The case was heard on Tuesday (8th); after hearing submissions from both sides, the Court of Final Appeal reserved its judgment.
The government argued that same-sex partners are not required to observe a “responsibility of maintenance during one’s lifetime” by providing financial support to their partners, unlike parties to opposite-sex marriages. It therefore said there was nothing improper about excluding same-sex partners from the Ordinance, and that same-sex partners could make wills at any time during their lifetimes. The government also said it was studying, following the Sham Tsz-kit case, the establishment of an alternative framework to recognise same-sex relationships, and that changing the definition of marriage in a “piecemeal” manner was currently inappropriate because it could cause confusion.
The gay man’s side countered that opposite-sex marriages overseas did not have to prove that they observed a “responsibility of maintenance during one’s lifetime” but were still protected by the Ordinance. The government should not assume that same-sex marriages carried no moral obligations, it said. It was also difficult to explain how the Ordinance’s simultaneous protection of spouses in polygamous relationships helped maintain the definition of marriage. The gay man’s side further said that most people in Hong Kong had not made wills, and that wills could be invalid for various reasons, making the government’s arguments a distraction.
男同志因擔心在無立遺囑下離世，丈夫無法按《無遺囑者遺產條例》繼承其財產，提出司法覆核獲判勝訴。政府提上訴被上訴庭駁回，再申請上訴至終審法院，案件周二（8 日）聆訊，終院法官聽畢雙方陳詞，擇日頒下判詞。
政府一方指，同性伴侶毋須遵守「生前贍養責任」 ，在財政上支援伴侶，有別於異性婚姻，所以《條例》排除同性伴侶並無不當，且同性伴侶生前可隨時訂立遺囑；加上政府正就「岑子杰案」研究設立替代框架承認同性伴侶關係，現不宜「斬件式」更改婚姻定義，以免混亂。
同志一方反駁指，海外異性婚姻毋須證明要守「生前贍養責任」，均受《條例》保障，政府不應假定同性婚姻沒道義責任。而《條例》同時保障一夫多妻關係的配偶，亦難以解釋如何有助維持婚姻定義。同志方又指，現時香港大部分人均沒訂立遺囑，且遺囑可因不同原因而無效，政府理據屬轉移視線。
30 Jun 2024集誌社#3753
娛樂牌風波｜同志驕傲月市集轉工廈舉行 入場需登記 參加者：好似變返得自己人知
Local LGBT organisation Big Love Alliance had originally planned to hold a three-day Pride Month market from yesterday (29 June), spanning 1 July. However, the event was halted after the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department notified the organisers that they did not hold an entertainment establishment licence. The organisers changed plans and moved the event today (30 June) to an industrial building in San Po Kong, where entry requires prior registration. The smaller event includes thematic sharing sessions and performances.
After the event was moved from a shopping mall in Tsim Sha Tsui to an industrial building, Big Love Alliance founder Francis said he found the venue through a friend’s introduction. Taking into account the venue, the availability of guests for the thematic sharing sessions and the schedules of the performing groups, they ultimately decided to hold the event on the final day of Pride Month.
本地同志組織「大同」原訂昨（29日）起，舉辦一連三日、橫跨 7.1 的「同志驕傲月市集」，然而，活動因臨時被食環通知未持有娛樂場所牌照需煞停。主辦方變陣，今（30日）移師在新蒲崗一工業大廈，舉辦需預先登記才能進場的小型活動，涵蓋專題分享及表演等。
活動從尖沙咀商場轉陣至工廈，「大同」創辦人Francis 表示，經好友介紹後覓得場地，而考慮到場地、專題分享嘉賓、表演團體檔期，最終決定在「同志驕傲月」最後一日舉辦活動。
27 Jun 2024集誌社#3741
食環指無娛樂牌 煞停同志市集 活動首次橫跨7.1 主辦方：三度舉辦皆未需申牌
Coinciding with Pride Month, local LGBT organisation Daatung had planned to hold the Pride Month Bazaar at iSQUARE in Tsim Sha Tsui from the 29th to July 1. However, the organiser announced on social media on the 25th that the event had to be cancelled after the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department notified it that it did not hold a Temporary Public Entertainment Licence or a Public Entertainment Licence. Daatung founder Francis told The Collective that it had organised similar events since 2021 without applying for a licence, and said the relevant departments’ enforcement standards were unclear.
適逢「同志驕傲月」，本地同志組織「大同」原訂後日（29日）至 7月 1 日，於尖沙咀 iSQUARE 舉辦「同志驕傲月市集」（Pride Month Bazaar）。然而，主辦方前日（25日）在社交媒體宣布，因被食環通知未持有「臨時公眾娛樂場所牌照」或「公眾娛樂場所牌照」，活動需要取消。「大同」創辦人Francis 接受《集誌社》訪問時坦言，自 2021 年已舉辦同類活動，以往亦無申領牌照，認為有關部門執法標準模糊。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
