25 Apr 2024法庭線#3433
First terrorism case | National security police testify Victor Chun Keung Wong approached them to change his plea to guilty; defence questions whether meeting notes were destroyed for another purpose
《反恐條例》首案，7 人不認罪，案件周四（25 日）在高院踏入第四天審訊。控方早前指稱同案認罪被告黃振強是「屠龍小隊」的領導人物，並傳召曾與黃會面的國安處警員劉偉雄（音譯）作供。
劉警供稱，是黃主動接洽警方稱擬認罪，而警方與他會面 3 次後，在第四次會面起為黃錄取「無損權益口供」；又指與黃共會面 10 次（見內文表），並否認過程涉利誘或威嚇黃。在盤問下，劉供稱向上級匯報後，將至少 8 次會面的筆記銷毀。
當中，辯方質疑劉銷毀錄取「無損權益口供」前的會面筆記，是否不欲辯方知悉過程中發生何事，以及不想法庭知悉黃有與警方溝通及討價還價。劉皆否認，又指就錄口供前的 3 次會面，黃主要僅稱想認罪及交代事件。案件周五續。
In the first case under the Anti-Terrorism Ordinance, seven defendants have pleaded not guilty. The case entered its fourth day of trial at the High Court on Thursday (25th). The prosecution earlier alleged that the guilty-plea defendant Victor Chun Keung Wong was the leader of the “Dragon Slaying Brigade squad”, and called national security officer Wai Hung (1976) Lau (phonetic translation), who had met Wong, to testify.
Officer Lau testified that Wong approached the police on his own initiative, saying that he intended to plead guilty. After meeting him three times, the police began recording a “without prejudice statement” from Wong at the fourth meeting. Lau also said that he met Wong 10 times in total (see the table in the main text), and denied that Wong had been induced or threatened during the process. Under cross-examination, Lau said that after reporting to his superiors, he destroyed notes from at least eight meetings.
The defence questioned whether Lau destroyed the notes from the meetings before the “without prejudice statement” was recorded because he did not want the defence to know what had happened during the process, or the court to know that Wong had communicated and bargained with the police. Lau denied both suggestions, and said that during the three meetings before the statement was recorded, Wong mainly only said that he wanted to plead guilty and explain the incident. The case will continue on Friday.
24 Apr 2024法庭線#3416
First Anti-Terrorism Case | 7 deny conspiracy to murder police and other charges; prosecution says some were members of “Dragon Slaying Brigade Squad”
2019 年 12 月 8 日「國際人權日大遊行」前夕，警方搜出大批武器，包括手槍、子彈等，事後多人被捕，被起訴多罪，包括政府首引《聯合國（反恐怖主義措施）條例》下的爆炸罪，最高可判終身監禁。
其中 6 男否認反恐條例、串謀殺警等罪受審，控方周三（24 日）在高等法院繼續讀出開案陳詞，指 3 名被告為「屠龍小隊」成員，曾到西貢試槍、測試炸彈引爆器、參與台灣軍訓等。另有被告偷大學實驗室化學品、有人則管理 Telegram 頻道安排眾籌。
控方形容，計劃一切就緒，最終未有實行，因警方作出拘捕，並強調串謀罪，毋須完成實質罪行。案件周四（25 日）續審。
On the eve of the “International Human Rights Day Grand March” on 8 December 2019, police seized a large quantity of weapons, including pistols and ammunition. Multiple people were subsequently arrested and charged with various offences, including the first-ever use by the government of the explosives offence under the United Nations (Anti-Terrorism Measures) Ordinance, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Six men denied charges under the anti-terrorism ordinance, conspiracy to murder police officers and other offences, and went on trial. On Wednesday (24th), the prosecution continued reading its opening statement in the High Court, alleging that three defendants were members of the “Dragon Slaying Brigade Squad” and had visited Sai Kung to test-fire guns, tested bomb detonators and taken part in military training in Taiwan. Another defendant allegedly stole chemicals from a university laboratory, while another managed a Telegram channel to arrange crowdfunding.
The prosecution said everything was ready for the plan, but it was ultimately not carried out because police made arrests. It stressed that for a conspiracy offence, the substantive offence does not have to be completed. The trial will continue on Thursday (25th).
23 Apr 2024法庭線#3407
First Terrorism Case | 7 Deny Conspiring to Murder Police and Other Charges; Prosecution Says Bombs and Police Shootings Were Planned During March
2019 年 12 月 8 日「國際人權日大遊行」前夕，警方搜出大批武器，包括手槍、子彈等，事後多人被捕，被起訴多罪，包括政府首引《聯合國（反恐怖主義措施）條例》下的爆炸罪，最高可判終身監禁。
7 名被告不認罪受審，控方周二（23 日）在高等法院讀出開案陳詞，指被告計劃在民陣遊行期間引爆炸彈，並在高處射擊到場警員，以逼使警員後退，再引爆威力達半徑 400 米、內有逾百枚鐵釘的炸彈；當警員被擊中時再「全民執槍」。
控方又指，事件牽涉「屠龍小隊」，部分被告曾在西貢試槍，亦曾到台灣接受軍訓；有被告曾問「幾時會搞殺狗」，另一同謀者回應稱「班緊槍」。控方另指，姑勿論陪審員政治觀點如何，「呢兩個炸彈所造成嘅傷害係無差別，亦都無分政治立場。遊行係民陣嘅，殺嘅係差人 … 大家諗下，差人多，定遊行嘅人士多？」案件周三（24 日）續審。
On the eve of the 8 December 2019 International Human Rights Day rally, police seized a large quantity of weapons, including pistols and ammunition. Several people were subsequently arrested and charged with multiple offences, including the government’s first prosecution for an explosives offence under the United Nations (Anti-Terrorism Measures) Ordinance, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
The seven defendants denied the charges and are standing trial. On Tuesday (23rd), the prosecution read its opening statement in the High Court, alleging that the defendants planned to detonate bombs during a Civil Human Rights Front march and shoot police officers attending from elevated positions, forcing them to retreat before detonating a bomb with a blast radius of 400 metres and more than 100 iron nails inside. When police officers were hit, they would then “take up arms en masse”.
The prosecution also said the case involved the “Dragon Slaying Brigade squad”. Some defendants had test-fired guns in Sai Kung and had also travelled to Taiwan for military training. One defendant had asked, “When are we going to kill the dogs?”, to which another conspirator replied, “Loading guns.” The prosecution further said that, regardless of the jurors’ political views, “the injuries caused by these two bombs would have been indiscriminate and would not distinguish between political positions. The march belonged to the Civil Human Rights Front, and those being killed were police officers … Think about it: are there more police officers, or more people at the march?” The trial continues on Wednesday (24th).
23 Apr 2024法庭線#3410
612 Fund Unregistered Society Case: Five Trustees’ Conviction Appeals Set for Hearing on January 8, 2025
已停運的「612 人道支援基金」被指無註冊，違反《社團條例》一案，5 名信託人包括天主教香港教區榮休主教陳日君、大律師吳靄儀、歌手何韻詩、嶺南大學前副教授許寶強及前立法會議員何秀蘭，提出定罪上訴。根據司法機構網頁，上訴已排期明年 1 月 8 日開審，預留 3 天審期。律政司回覆指，沒收到施城威提出上訴的通知書。
本案為首宗，因沒為組織註冊成社團而被票控、被告經審訊被裁定罪成的案件。5 名信託人連同基金秘書施城威，2022 年 11 月 25 日在西九龍裁判法院被裁定罪成，判處罰款 2,500 元至 4,000 元。
In the case concerning the now-defunct “612 Humanitarian Relief Fund”, which was alleged to have violated the Societies Ordinance by failing to register, five trustees have appealed against their convictions. They are Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, emeritus bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong; barrister Margaret Ng; singer Denise Ho; former Lingnan University associate professor Hui Po-keung; and former Legislative Council member Cyd Ho. According to the Judiciary’s website, the appeal has been scheduled to begin on January 8 next year, with three days reserved for the hearing. The Department of Justice said it had not received a notice of appeal from Sze Ching-wee.
This is the first case in which defendants were prosecuted by summons for failing to register an organisation as a society and were convicted after trial. The five trustees, together with the fund secretary Sze Ching-wee, were convicted at West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on November 25, 2022, and fined between HK$2,500 and HK$4,000.
22 Apr 2024法庭線#3406
First anti-terrorism case | Firearms found before march; 7 deny bombing and other charges under anti-terrorism law as 9-member jury empanelled
2019 年 12 月 8 日「國際人權日大遊行」前夕，警方搜出大批武器，包括手槍、子彈等，事後 14 人被捕，被起訴多罪，包括政府首引《聯合國（反恐怖主義措施）條例》下的「串謀犯對訂明標的之爆炸罪」起訴。
其中 7 人不認罪受審，包括張俊富、張銘裕及嚴文謙，「3C 維修工作室」東主賴振邦等人，案件周一（22 日）在高等法院開審。法庭抽出 3 男 6 女陪審團，押後至周二（23 日）續審，料由控方讀出開案陳詞。
On the eve of the 8 December 2019 International Human Rights Day march, police found a large quantity of weapons, including pistols and ammunition. Fourteen people were subsequently arrested and charged with multiple offences, including the first charge brought by the government under the United Nations (Anti-Terrorism Measures) Ordinance: conspiracy to commit the offence of bombing a prescribed target.
Seven people pleaded not guilty and are standing trial, including CHEUNG Chun-fu, Cheung Ming-yu and Yim Man-Him, as well as Lai Chun-pong, the owner of “3C Repair Workshop”. The case opened at the High Court on Monday (22nd). The court empanelled a jury of three men and six women and adjourned the trial until Tuesday (23rd), when the prosecution is expected to deliver its opening statement.
17 Apr 2024集誌社#3366
Vehicle Registration Searches | HKJA Says Transport Department Arrangement Unconstitutional; High Court Grants Leave for Judicial Review
運輸署 1 月初宣布收緊車輛查冊，因新聞用途等原因查車牌只能透過「例外情況」申請，由運輸署長「把關」。記協在 4 月初入禀高等法院，司法覆核運輸署新安排，要求法庭裁定有關政策違憲。高等法院法官高浩文今頒布書面判詞批出司法覆核申請許可，聆訊排期不早於 7 月 8 日，日子待雙方律師於兩周內提供檔期。
The Transport Department announced in early January that it would tighten access to vehicle registration records. Applications to search vehicle registration details for reasons including journalistic purposes would only be allowed through “exceptional circumstances”, with the Director of Transport acting as the gatekeeper. The Hong Kong Journalists Association filed a judicial review application in the High Court in early April, asking the court to rule that the new arrangement was unconstitutional. High Court Judge Ko Ho-man issued written reasons today granting leave for the judicial review. The hearing will be scheduled no earlier than 8 July, with the date to be provided by the lawyers for both sides within two weeks.
17 Apr 2024法庭線#3369
Hong Kong Journalists Association Seeks Judicial Review of Transport Department’s Tightened Restrictions on Journalists’ Vehicle-Registration Searches; High Court Grants Leave, Hearing Earliest in July
香港記者協會今年 4 月 5 日入稟高等法院提司法覆核，挑戰運輸署署長今年 1 月就車牌查冊實施的新安排，質疑安排有違言論自由和新聞自由原則，要求法庭裁定運輸署現行政策違憲。
高等法院法官高浩文周三（17 日）頒下判詞，批出司法覆核許可，並請各方在 14 天內，擬定不早於今年 7 月 8 日的審期。
The Hong Kong Journalists Association filed a judicial review application in the High Court on April 5 this year, challenging new arrangements implemented by the Commissioner for Transport in January this year concerning searches of vehicle-registration records. It questioned whether the arrangements violated the principles of freedom of expression and press freedom, and asked the court to rule that the Transport Department’s current policy was unconstitutional.
High Court Judge Godfrey Lam handed down his judgment on Wednesday (17th), granting leave for the judicial review. He asked all parties to agree within 14 days on a hearing date no earlier than July 8 this year.
17 Apr 2024法庭線#3370
Man linked to Spark Alliance convicted of laundering about $600,000; jailed for 16 months
警方 2019 年 12 月，以涉嫌「洗黑錢」罪，拘捕被指與「星火同盟」相關的 3 男 1 女。其中一名現年 22 歲男子，其後被控利用銀行户口洗黑錢，涉款約 60 萬元。他不認罪，經審訊被裁定罪成，周三（17 日）被判囚 16 個月。案件將於 5 月 2 日再開庭處理充公令。
區院暫委法官高偉雄判刑時指，雖然無證據指牽涉的款項與任何罪行有關，或者被告知悉牽涉罪行仍處理款項，但這些不一定是減刑因素。法官亦考慮罪行的嚴重性，沒跟隨報告建議判入勞教中心。法官亦不同意辯方指案件出現延誤，但考慮候審 4 年半令被告感焦慮，期間他重考文憑試、獲中大錄取，已展開新生活，酌情減刑兩個月。
In December 2019, police arrested three men and one woman suspected of being connected with the Spark Alliance on suspicion of money laundering. One of the men, now aged 22, was subsequently charged with using a bank account to launder about $600,000. He pleaded not guilty but was convicted after trial and sentenced to 16 months in prison on Wednesday (the 17th). The case will return to court on May 2 to deal with a confiscation order.
In sentencing, District Court acting judge Ko Wai-hung said there was no evidence that the funds involved were connected with any offence, or that the defendant knew the funds were linked to criminal activity, but these were not necessarily mitigating factors. The judge also considered the seriousness of the offence and declined to follow the report’s recommendation of a training centre order. He disagreed with the defence’s submission that there had been delay in the case, but took into account that the four and a half years spent awaiting trial had caused the defendant anxiety. During that period, the defendant retook the Diploma of Secondary Education Examination, was admitted to The Chinese University of Hong Kong and had begun a new life. The judge exercised discretion to reduce the sentence by two months.
17 Apr 2024法庭線#3371
Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China Data-Disclosure Refusal Case: Chow Hang-tung and Two Others’ Applications for Certificate to Appeal to CFA Rejected by High Court
支聯會前副主席鄒幸彤與兩名前常委鄧岳君、徐漢光，被控拒交資料一案，3 人上訴失敗後，周三（17 日）申請上訴至終院證明書。鄒親自陳詞，指擬續爭議條文詮釋，指控方須證明被告屬於外國代理人，稱法律不應成為有權勢者任意操縱、「無限彈性」的工具。
高院法官黎婉姬聽取雙方陳詞後，指申請方的議題不涉重大而廣泛重要的法律觀點，拒絕申請。按法例，3 人仍可直接向終院申請上訴許可。此外，鄧、徐申請保釋等候上訴，被黎拒絕，指未能信納兩人不會繼續進行危害國安活動。兩人繼續服刑。
3 人均由懲教押送到庭應訊，鄒穿橙黃色上衣、杏色外套，開庭前與旁聽互道早晨；鄧、徐頻向旁聽人士微笑及揮手，鄧一度舉起「V 字」手勢，神情從容。3 人原審罪成，被判囚 4 個半月。
Chow Hang-tung, former vice-chairwoman of the Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, and former Standing Committee members Tang Ngok Kwan and Hon Kwong Tsui, were convicted of refusing to provide information. After their appeals failed, the three applied on Wednesday (17th) for certificates to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. Chow made submissions in person, saying they intended to continue disputing the interpretation of the relevant provisions. She said the prosecution had to prove that the defendants were foreign agents, and that the law should not become a tool that those in power could manipulate at will, with “unlimited flexibility”.
After hearing submissions from both sides, High Court judge Anna Yuen Kee Lai said the issues raised by the applicants did not involve points of law of great and general importance and rejected the applications. Under the law, the three may still apply directly to the Court of Final Appeal for leave to appeal. In addition, Tang and Tsui applied for bail pending appeal, but Judge Lai refused, saying the court was not satisfied that they would not continue activities endangering national security. The two will continue serving their sentences.
All three were escorted to court from prison. Chow wore an orange-yellow top and an almond-coloured jacket and exchanged good mornings with members of the public before the hearing. Tang and Tsui frequently smiled and waved to people in the public gallery; Tang at one point raised a V gesture and appeared composed. All three were convicted at trial and sentenced to four and a half months’ imprisonment.
17 Apr 2024法庭線#3372
7.21 Yuen Long | Ninth white-shirted man convicted of rioting and other offences; 42-year-old pleads guilty and jailed 55 months, judge says he led and directed
元朗 7.21 襲擊 ，事隔 4 年後再多 4 名白衣人被落案起訴暴動等罪，其中一人早前認罪，周四（18 日）在區域法院被判囚 55 月。他是第九名白衣人罪成，報稱沒三合會背景。
暫委法官鄧少雄判刑時指，被告完整參與整個「7.21 白衣人」事件的暴動和傷人過程，又指他曾挑釁、威嚇、襲擊黑衣人和車廂上市民，亦曾招手著其他白衣人進入元朗站付費區，指他帶頭指揮。
就暴動及串謀傷人罪，法官各以 7 年為量刑起點，被告認罪獲 3 分 1 刑期扣減。另被告曾做義工，再扣減 1 個月，終判囚 4 年 7 個月。
Four more white-shirted men were charged with rioting and other offences four years after the 7.21 Yuen Long attack. One of them had earlier pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 55 months in prison at the District Court on Thursday (18th). He was the ninth white-shirted man to be convicted and was reported to have no triad background.
In sentencing, acting judge Daniel Siu Hung Tang said the defendant had fully participated in the rioting and assaults throughout the entire “7.21 white-shirted men” incident. The judge said he had provoked, threatened and assaulted people in black and members of the public in the train compartments, and had also waved for other white-shirted men to enter the paid area of Yuen Long Station, saying that he had led and directed them.
For the charges of rioting and conspiracy to wound, the judge adopted seven years as the starting point for sentencing on each charge. The defendant received a one-third reduction for pleading guilty. A further one-month reduction was given for his volunteer work, resulting in a sentence of four years and seven months in prison.
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
