30 Jun 2025法庭線#6968
Second Anti-Terrorism Case | Defence Completes Evidence, Prosecution to Make Closing Submissions Next Week; Jury Expected to Retire for Deliberations in Late August
2020 年初，明愛醫院、羅湖站港鐵車廂被發現有爆炸品，Telegram 頻道「九十二籤」事後承認責任。7 人被控《反恐條例》罪名，餘下 1 人被控以「企圖製造炸藥」罪。8 人不認罪，周一（6 月 30 日）於高院踏入第 126 天審訊。
控辯雙方舉證完畢，案件押至下周一（7 月 7 日）由控方結案陳詞，預料需時 5 至 7 日，其後由辯方結案陳詞、法官陳仲衡引導，預料陪審團於 8 月底退庭商議。
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in an MTR train carriage at Lo Wu Station. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Lots” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-Terrorism Ordinance, while the remaining defendant was charged with attempting to manufacture explosives. All eight pleaded not guilty, and the trial at the High Court entered its 126th day on Monday (June 30).
Both the prosecution and the defence have completed presenting evidence. The case was adjourned until next Monday (July 7), when the prosecution will make its closing submissions, which are expected to take five to seven days. The defence will then make its closing submissions, followed by the summing-up by Judge Chan Chung-hang. The jury is expected to retire for deliberations in late August.
27 Jun 2025集誌社#6957
Government gazettes ruling suspending Albert Ho’s solicitor’s practising qualification for three months
支聯會前主席何俊仁因被控「煽動顛覆國家政權」罪而遭還押多時，政府今日（27日）刊憲公布，按照律師紀律審裁組 5 月中裁定，就何俊仁因多項「煽惑他人明知而參與未經批准集結」而違反《香港事務律師專業操守指引》，將其律師執業資格吊銷三個月，以及需於 9 月 30 日前，支付合共 18.7 萬元事務費用等。
Former Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China chairman Albert Ho, who has been remanded in custody for a considerable period after being charged with “inciting subversion of State power”, had his solicitor’s practising qualification suspended for three months, the Government Gazette announced today (27th). The measure follows a ruling by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in mid-May that Ho had breached the Hong Kong Solicitors’ Guide to Professional Conduct in relation to multiple counts of “inciting another person knowingly to participate in an unauthorised assembly”. He must also pay a total of $187,000 in costs by 30 September.
27 Jun 2025法庭線#6958
Anti-terrorism case No. 2 | Prosecution questions why no complaint was made to family about police beating; fourth defendant: “What authority did my father have?”
2020 年初，明愛醫院、羅湖港鐵車廂被發現有爆炸品，Telegram 頻道「九十二籤」事後承認責任。7 人被控《反恐條例》罪名，餘下 1 人被控以「企圖製造炸藥」罪。8 人不認罪，周五（27 日）於高院踏入第 125 天審訊，第四被告張家俊繼續作供。
控方質疑，張聲稱被警察毆打，導致胸口及左膝疼痛，卻沒有在搜屋時向父親投訴。張指已自行向值日官作出投訴，反問「我爸爸有咩權力？我投訴嚟做咩？」控方追問，為何沒有要求父親報警。張則笑稱「成間屋都係差人，報咩警？報警只不過令間屋再多啲警察。」
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in an MTR train compartment at Lo Wu, and the Telegram channel “九十二籤” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, while one remaining defendant was charged with “attempting to manufacture explosives”. All eight pleaded not guilty. On Friday (the 27th), the trial at the High Court entered its 125th day, with the fourth defendant Christopher Ka Tsun Cheung continuing to give evidence.
The prosecution questioned why Cheung, who claimed that police officers had beaten him, causing pain in his chest and left knee, had not complained to his father during the search of the home. Cheung said he had made a complaint directly to the duty officer, asking: “What authority did my father have? What was the point of my making a complaint?” The prosecution pressed him on why he had not asked his father to call the police. Cheung replied with a laugh: “The whole flat was full of police officers. What was I supposed to report to the police? Calling the police would only put more police officers in the flat.”
26 Jun 2025法庭線#6952
8.25 Kwai Chung | Three jailed for 25 to 30 months for conspiracy to commit unlawful assembly; appeal against sentencing points 21 months higher than co-defendants’ rejected
2019 年 8 月 25 日的「荃葵青遊行」原獲警方批准，及後有人堵路，遭警方驅散。10 名男女被控串謀暴動等罪，各人先後承認屬交替控罪的串謀非法集結罪。當中 7 人於較早階段認罪，另 3 人於開審前認罪。
較早階段認罪 7 人的判刑，由暫委法官王興偉處理，官以 15 個月作量刑起點；開審前認罪的 3 人則由法官練錦鴻處理判刑，官認為適合的量刑為 3 年。換言之，3 人較同案被告，量刑起點高 21 個月。3 人不服刑期申上訴許可，周四（26 日）於高院處理。
上訴方強調，原審法官量刑基準過高。上訴庭法官彭偉昌及潘敏琦則認為，上訴人罪責近乎暴動，原審官採納較高量刑「何錯之有」，又提到各人到場目的昭然若揭，車上更有彈珠及行山杖等，可致人受傷，須判處阻嚇性刑罰。上訴庭即日拒批上訴許可，3 人繼續服刑，料分別今年 8 月至 9 月出獄。
The “Tsuen Wan-Kwai Tsing march” on 25 August 2019 had initially been approved by police. Road blockages subsequently occurred and the police dispersed the crowd. Ten men and women were charged with conspiracy to riot and other offences, and each later pleaded guilty to the alternative charge of conspiracy to commit unlawful assembly. Seven pleaded guilty at an earlier stage, while the other three pleaded guilty before trial.
The sentences for the seven who pleaded guilty at an earlier stage were handled by acting judge Newman Hing Wai Wong, who adopted a sentencing starting point of 15 months. The three who pleaded guilty before trial were sentenced by Judge Eddie Yip Chun-hung, who considered three years to be the appropriate sentence. In other words, the sentencing starting point for the three was 21 months higher than that for the other defendants in the same case. The three applied for leave to appeal against their sentences, and the matter was heard in the High Court on Thursday (26th).
The appellants stressed that the trial judge’s sentencing benchmark was too high. High Court judges Brian Pak Wai-cheong and Maggie Poon Man-ki considered, however, that the appellants’ culpability was close to that involved in rioting, and said there was nothing wrong with the trial judge adopting a higher sentencing level. They also noted that the purpose of their presence was plainly evident, and that marbles and hiking sticks, among other items capable of injuring people, had been found in the vehicle. Deterrent sentences were therefore required. The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal immediately, and the three will continue serving their sentences. They are expected to be released between August and September this year.
26 Jun 2025法庭線#6954
Anti-terrorism case 2 | Fourth defendant questions whether submitted Telegram chat list was modified; prosecution: defence never raised dispute
2020 年初，明愛醫院、羅湖港鐵車廂被發現有爆炸品，Telegram 頻道「九十二籤」事後承認責任。7 人被控《反恐條例》罪名，餘下 1 人被控以「企圖製造炸藥」罪。8 人不認罪，周四（26 日）於高院踏入第 124 天審訊，第四被告張家俊繼續作供。
張家俊早前曾供稱，警員威逼他在記事冊上抄寫聲明及簽名。控方今指出，張聲稱被逼簽署記事冊，但警員沒有在記事冊寫他承認「有份整炸彈」，反而寫了「無份整炸彈」。張同意。
張又提到，今年 1 月 8 日，於庭上開啟涉案手機及測試 TG 密碼時，他留意到 TG 對話列表的畫面，與他被捕時對話列表的次序有不同，質疑曾被修改。控方指，根據控辯雙方承認事實，該涉案手機的證物鏈不受爭議，張一方亦從沒有提出相關爭議，或要求傳召警員或專家證人作供。案件周五續。
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in a Lo Wu MTR train compartment. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Divinations” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, while the remaining person was charged with “attempting to manufacture explosives”. All eight pleaded not guilty. The trial entered its 124th day at the High Court on Thursday (the 26th), with fourth defendant Christopher Ka Tsun Cheung continuing to give evidence.
Christopher Ka Tsun Cheung had earlier testified that police officers intimidated him into copying a statement into a notebook and signing it. The prosecution pointed out today that although Cheung claimed he had been forced to sign the notebook, the police officer did not write in it that he admitted to “being involved in making bombs”, but instead wrote “not involved in making bombs”. Cheung agreed.
Cheung also said that on 8 January this year, when the phone involved in the case was opened in court and its Telegram password was tested, he noticed that the order of the conversations in the Telegram chat list differed from the order when he was arrested, and questioned whether it had been modified. The prosecution said that, according to the facts admitted by both the prosecution and defence, the chain of custody of the phone was not in dispute, and Cheung’s side had never raised such a dispute or requested that police officers or expert witnesses be called to testify. The case will continue on Friday.
26 Jun 2025法庭線#6955
Five-and-a-half-year sentence for biting off police sergeant’s finger; To Kai Wa denied leave to study law in UK and seeks judicial review
2019 年 7 月 14 日，沙田新城巿廣場爆發警民衝突，港大畢業生杜啟華被指咬斷警長手指，襲警等 4 罪成判囚 5 年半。杜於 2024 年獲釋後，須遵守為期 22 個月的監管令。
杜隨後報讀英國一所大學的法律學士課程，獲有條件取錄，遂向懲教署監管個案覆檢委員會申請，於 2025 年 8 月離港赴英。委員會考慮後拒批申請，亦駁回其上訴，指杜過去雖沒違反監管令、但欠真誠悔意，如讓他離港，他可能會再變得激進，危害國安，署方亦無法遙距監管。
杜不服決定，周三（25 日）入稟高等法院提出司法覆核，指署方決定有違法例保障的人身自由及出入境自由，又認為委員會的決定，與監管令的法定目的，即協助釋囚更生背道而馳，要求法庭下令撤銷委員會決定。
On 14 July 2019, clashes between police and members of the public broke out at Sha Tin New Town Plaza. University of Hong Kong graduate To Kai Wa was accused of biting off a police sergeant’s finger and was convicted of four offences, including assaulting police, and sentenced to five and a half years in prison. To was released in 2024 and required to comply with a 22-month supervision order.
To subsequently enrolled in a bachelor’s degree in law at a university in the UK and received a conditional offer of admission. He therefore applied to the Correctional Services Department’s Supervision Case Review Board for permission to leave Hong Kong for the UK in August 2025. After considering the application, the board rejected it and dismissed his appeal, saying that although To had not previously breached the supervision order, he lacked sincere remorse. If allowed to leave Hong Kong, he might become radicalised again and endanger national security, while the department would be unable to supervise him remotely.
Dissatisfied with the decision, To filed for judicial review in the High Court on Wednesday (25th), arguing that the department’s decision contravened the legally protected freedoms of the person and of entering and leaving Hong Kong. He also argued that the board’s decision ran counter to the statutory purpose of a supervision order—namely, assisting released prisoners in rehabilitation—and asked the court to quash the board’s decision.
25 Jun 2025法庭線#6950
Kwok Cheuk-kin accused of gambling while bankrupt and failing to report over $90,000 in income; bankruptcy extended by 1.5 years
「長洲覆核王」郭卓堅被指拖欠訟費，於 2020 年被頒令破產，其破產令原定於 2025 年 7 月自動解除。破產管理署代表反對自動解除郭的破產，指郭於破產期間賭博及漏報逾 9 萬元收入，要求延長破產期。案件周三（25 日）於高院聆訊。郭沒有出庭應訊，亦沒有法律代表。聆案官葉樹培最終下令延長其破產期 1 年 6 個月。
Kwok Cheuk-kin, known as the “Cheung Chau Review King”, was declared bankrupt in 2020 over unpaid legal costs. His bankruptcy order was originally due to be automatically discharged in July 2025. The Official Receiver opposed the automatic discharge, alleging that Kwok had gambled during his bankruptcy and failed to report income of more than $90,000, and sought an extension of the bankruptcy period. The case was heard in the High Court on Wednesday (25th). Kwok did not appear and had no legal representation. Master Lawrence Sue Pui Yip ultimately ordered that his bankruptcy period be extended by 1 year and 6 months.
25 Jun 2025法庭線#6951
Oct 6 Wan Chai riot: acquittals of five quashed; three pleaded guilty and two convicted after cases reopened, jailed 2 years to 3 years 2 weeks
2019 年 10 月 6 日，《禁蒙面法》生效後翌日，網民發起「反極權反緊急法大遊行」，5 人包括一名案發時 15 歲男生被控暴動，經審訊後獲裁罪名不成立。上訴庭裁定律政司上訴得直，撤銷無罪裁決，發還原審重新考慮。兩名被告重開辯方案情，經審訊後被判罪成，與早前認罪的 3 人一併押至周三（25 日）在區域法院判刑。
暫委法官高偉雄指，暴動造成的破壞「絕非輕微」，以 42 個月為量刑起點，因應被告獲判無罪至今 3 年半，期間已有更生，等候亦帶來一定焦慮，減刑 3 個月，並基於被告在原審時，已因禁蒙面法罪服刑，扣減該刑期後，判認罪被告各囚 2 年 2 星期至 2 年 2 個月；重啟案情後罪成的兩人則分別判囚 2 年半及 3 年 2 星期。
On October 6, 2019, the day after the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation took effect, netizens launched an “Anti-Authoritarian, Anti-Emergency Regulations Ordinance March”. Five people, including a boy who was 15 at the time of the incident, were charged with rioting and acquitted after trial. The Court of Appeal allowed the Department of Justice’s appeal, quashed the acquittals and remitted the cases to the trial court for reconsideration. Two defendants reopened their cases and were convicted after trial. They were taken to the District Court on Wednesday (the 25th) for sentencing together with three others who had earlier pleaded guilty.
Acting Judge Ko Wai-hung said the damage caused by the riot was “far from minor”. Using 42 months as the starting point, he reduced the sentences by three months because three and a half years had passed since the defendants were acquitted, during which they had rehabilitated themselves, and because the wait had caused a degree of anxiety. After deducting the terms they had already served for offences under the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation at the original trial, the defendants who pleaded guilty were sentenced to between two years and two years and two months in prison. The two defendants convicted after their cases were reopened were sentenced to two and a half years and three years and two weeks, respectively.
24 Jun 2025法庭線#6944
Junius Ho sues Alvin Yeung, Lam Cheuk-ting and Claudia Mo for defamation; court allows reliance on Lam’s riot conviction and adjourns case pending appeal
何君堯 2019 年入稟高等法院，指 3 名前立法會議員郭榮鏗、林卓廷及毛孟靜在警察機動部隊總部外抗議時，誹謗他為「黑社會」，要求頒令 3 人賠償及禁制他們作相關言論。案件周二（24 日）於高等法院聆訊。
何君堯一方早前提出加入林卓廷在 721 案中暴動罪成的判決作為證據。林卓廷一方則提出，林正就暴動定罪提上訴，望官准押後本案。高院法官楊家雄決定批准兩方申請，並一併押後針對郭榮鏗及毛孟靜的訴訟，待上訴有結果。
Junius Ho filed a High Court action in 2019, alleging that three former Legislative Council members, Alvin Yeung, Lam Cheuk-ting and Claudia Mo, defamed him by calling him a “triad” while protesting outside the Police Tactical Unit Headquarters. He sought orders requiring the three to pay damages and restraining them from making related statements. The case was heard at the High Court on Tuesday (24th).
Ho’s side had earlier applied to adduce as evidence the judgment convicting Lam of rioting in the 7.21 case. Lam’s side submitted that he was appealing against his riot conviction and sought an adjournment of the case. High Court Judge Keith Kar Hung Yeung approved both applications and also adjourned the proceedings against Yeung and Mo pending the outcome of the appeal.
24 Jun 2025法庭線#6945
Assistant solicitor convicted and fined for unauthorisedly helping Chow Ka-shing send complaint letter applies for certificate to appeal to top court
2023 年 5 月，因「47 人案」還押的鄒家成，被指未經授權下，透過律師寄出予申訴專員公署的投訴信，投訴懲教署損毀及拒絕，其親友送入的兩本佛學書籍。鄒與一名女律師被裁定「將未經授權的物品攜離監獄」罪成，鄒判囚 3 日，律師罰款 1,800 元。
二人不服上訴，高院法官張慧玲維持定罪裁決，但改判鄒罰款 1,800 元。司法機構網頁最新顯示，涉案律師向高院申請上訴至終院許可證明書，聆訊排期今年 8 月 6 日展開，料需時 30 分鐘。該律師早前另亦同步向終院提出上訴許可申請，暫未排期聆訊
In May 2023, Chow Ka-shing, who was remanded in custody over the “47-person case”, was accused of sending, through a lawyer and without authorisation, a complaint letter to the Office of the Ombudsman alleging that the Correctional Services Department had damaged and refused to accept two Buddhist books brought in by his relatives and friends. Chow and a female lawyer were convicted of the offence of taking unauthorised articles out of prison. Chow was sentenced to three days’ imprisonment, while the lawyer was fined HK$1,800.
The two appealed. High Court Judge Cheung Wai-ling upheld the convictions but replaced Chow’s sentence with a fine of HK$1,800. The Judiciary’s latest website listing shows that the lawyer has applied to the High Court for a certificate granting leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. The hearing is scheduled to begin on 6 August this year and is expected to last 30 minutes. The lawyer had earlier also applied directly to the Court of Final Appeal for leave to appeal; no hearing date has yet been set.
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
