12 Jun 2025法庭線#6901
反修例六年 街頭事件案件數據分析 近2400人被控13類罪名 未完的案有哪些？
Six years after the Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Movement, police say more than 10,000 people were arrested and nearly 3,000 prosecuted, but have not provided a breakdown by offence. Over the past several years, The Witness has tracked riot cases. This year, it expanded its scope to compile and analyse more than 2,000 court cases involving different charges that arose from street incidents, using data to review the largest and longest-running social movement in Hong Kong to date.
On 9 June 2019, the Civil Human Rights Front organised a large march against amendments to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance. Some protesters who remained at the “bottom of the LegCo building” in the early hours were charged with unlawful assembly, marking the beginning of a series of cases. The government initially refused to withdraw the bill, while society began pressing for the “five demands”. Demonstration-related clashes gradually intensified, reaching a peak in November — on one day of the clashes at the Polytechnic University, 242 people were charged with rioting.
The reporters counted the most common charges and found that the Department of Justice most frequently brought charges of rioting, unlawful assembly, possession of instruments fit for unlawful purposes, assaulting or obstructing police, and possession of offensive weapons, involving more than 2,350 person-charges in total. Tracking 2,382 defendants across 13 categories of offences, the reporters found that 71% were convicted of at least one offence. Of the 1,285 people sentenced to imprisonment, most received terms of less than one year; 29 had aggregate sentences of six years or more.
Six years on, dozens of cases remain unresolved. The second anti-terrorism legislation case involving explosives has already been heard for more than 100 days and is continuing, while the final PolyU riot case will go to trial next year. Some cases have entered the appeal stage. The 7.1 LegCo riot case involving Wong Chung-yeung, Hiu Laam Suen and others is scheduled to be heard in December this year, while the 7.21 case involving people who were not wearing white shirts remains awaiting a hearing date.
反修例運動至今 6 年，警方指拘捕逾一萬人，檢控近 3,000 人，但未提供罪行分類數字。《法庭線》過去數年追蹤暴動案件，今年擴大範圍，整理及分析超過 2,000 宗在街頭發生、涉及不同控罪的法庭案件，用數據回顧這場至今規模最大、歷時最長的社運。
2019 年 6 月 9 日，民陣發起反修訂《逃犯條例》大遊行，有示威者凌晨逗留立法會「煲底」被控非法集結，揭開連串案件序幕。政府起初拒撤回草案，社會醞釀爭取「五大訴求」，示威衝突漸變激烈，至 11 月達至高峰——理大衝突的其中一天有 242 人被控暴動。
記者統計最常見的控罪，發現律政司起用暴動、非法集結、管有非法用途工具、襲警／阻差，以及管有攻擊性武器的次數最多，共逾 2,350 人次被控。記者亦以 13 類控罪追蹤到 2,382 名被告，發現當中 71% 人至少一罪成；而被判囚的 1,285 人之中，大部分刑期在一年以下，當中 29 人的總刑期達至 6 年或以上。
6 年過去，未完的案仍有數十宗。涉及爆炸品的反恐條例第二案已審逾 100 天，仍在繼續，而最後一宗理大暴動案明年開審。部分進入上訴階段，王宗堯、孫曉嵐等人的 71 立法會暴動案排期今年 12 月審理，林卓廷等人的 721 非白衣人案則尚待排期。
11 Jun 2025法庭線#6888
反恐第二案｜第四被告稱被警員打胸口、踩膝蓋 「有意無意」展示配槍逼簽記事冊
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in a Lo Wu MTR train carriage. The Telegram channel “92 Lots” later claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, while one other person was charged with “attempting to manufacture explosives”. All eight pleaded not guilty. The trial entered its 114th day at the High Court on Wednesday (11th).
The fourth defendant Christopher Ka Tsun Cheung testified that officers broke into his home and punched him in the chest when he was arrested. He said officers later forced him to sign a police notebook confirming that he had said under caution that he was “not involved in making bombs” and that someone was “testing some explosives” at a unit in Wang Cheong Building. Cheung denied making those statements and said an officer “intentionally or unintentionally” displayed the service pistol at his waist and threatened him, saying: “Just try not signing.”
Cheung also said that an officer had stamped on his left knee during the arrest. Afterward, he was taken from his residence to a police station and an office for investigation. During that time, his left leg hurt and he “could not put it on the ground”, requiring support from officers. He still needed physiotherapy while on remand, and his knee occasionally remains painful. His gait and pelvis have also been affected.
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，周三（11 日）於高院踏入第 114 天審訊。
第四被告張家俊出庭作供，指他被捕時曾遭警員破門入屋、拳打胸口等，警員其後強迫他簽署記事冊，確認在警誡下稱自己「無份整炸彈」、有人在宏創坊單位「試緊啲炸藥」等。張否認曾說過這些內容，並指當時警員「有意無意」地展示腰間配槍，威嚇說「你試吓唔簽？」
張又指，被捕時有警員曾踩他左膝，其後他被帶離住所，往警署及辦公室調查，期間左腳感痛楚「唔可以掂地」，需警員攙扶。他在還押期間仍需接受物理治療，現時膝蓋偶爾會感到痛楚，步姿及盤骨亦受影響。
11 Jun 2025法庭線#6896
FB發帖被指不當遭革職 官中教師覆核勝訴 政府上訴指帖文鼓吹暴力
A government-school teacher was accused of posting inappropriate comments targeting the police on Facebook during the 2019 anti-extradition bill movement. Following a disciplinary hearing, she was found to have engaged in misconduct and was dismissed by the Civil Service Bureau. She earlier sought a judicial review, arguing that the authorities had wrongly found her to have engaged in misconduct, and won. The Civil Service Bureau, dissatisfied with the decision, lodged an appeal, which began at the High Court on Tuesday (10th).
The government argued that the teacher’s conduct was serious and openly disregarded government guidelines. It said the public expected teachers to nurture the next generation, not advocate violence, while her posts deepened social divisions and had to be dealt with seriously. The government also argued that the decision could not be considered unreasonable merely because the teacher faced financial difficulties after being dismissed.
The defence argued that the teacher had performed well during her 27 years as a civil servant, and that dismissal had dealt her a severe blow. She had lost her retirement benefits and developed depression. It also argued that the bureau had not given reasons for its decision or considered other disciplinary options, such as compulsory retirement, causing her injustice. After hearing submissions from both sides, the three judges of the Court of Appeal said they would deliver their judgment within nine months.
一名官校教師被指 2019 年反修例運動期間，在 Facebook 發表針對警方的不當言論，經紀律聆訊後被裁定行為不當，遭公務員事務局革職。她早前提出司法覆核，指當局錯誤裁定她行為失當，獲判勝訴。公務員事務局不服決定提上訴，周二（10 日）在高等法院開庭處理。
政府方指，教師的行為嚴重，公然漠視政府指引，又指公眾期望教師培育下一代，非鼓吹暴力，惟其帖文加深社會分歧，當局必須嚴肅跟進。政府方又指，教師不能因被革職面對經濟困難，便說局方決定不合理。
答辯方則指，教師任公務員 27 年間表現良好，革職對她造成嚴重打擊，除失去退休福利，亦患上抑鬱症，又指局方作決定時沒給予解釋，亦沒考慮其他處分方案，例如強制退休，對她造成不公。上訴庭 3 位法官聽畢雙方陳詞，將於 9 個月內頒判詞。
11 Jun 2025法庭線#6897
反恐第二案｜第四被告稱被警員打胸口、踩膝蓋 「有意無意」展示配槍逼簽記事冊
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in a Lo Wu MTR train carriage. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Lots” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-Terrorism Ordinance, while one remaining person was charged with “attempting to manufacture explosives”. All eight pleaded not guilty, and the trial at the High Court entered its 114th day on Wednesday (the 11th).
The fourth defendant Christopher Ka Tsun Cheung testified that, when he was arrested, police officers broke into his home and punched him in the chest, among other things. He said officers later forced him to sign a police notebook confirming that, under caution, he had said he “had no part in making the bombs” and that someone was “testing some explosives” at a unit in Wang Chong Fong. Cheung denied saying these things and said the officers “intentionally or unintentionally” displayed the service pistols at their waists to intimidate him, saying, “You try not signing?”
Cheung also said that, during his arrest, a police officer stepped on his left knee. After he was taken from his residence to a police station and offices for investigation, his left leg hurt and he “could not put it on the ground”, requiring support from police officers. He continued to receive physiotherapy while on remand. His knee still occasionally hurts, and his gait and pelvis have also been affected.
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，周三（11 日）於高院踏入第 114 天審訊。
第四被告張家俊出庭作供，指他被捕時曾遭警員破門入屋、拳打胸口等，警員其後強迫他簽署記事冊，確認在警誡下稱自己「無份整炸彈」、有人在宏創坊單位「試緊啲炸藥」等。張否認曾說過這些內容，並指當時警員「有意無意」地展示腰間配槍，威嚇說「你試吓唔簽？」
張又指，被捕時有警員曾踩他左膝，其後他被帶離住所，往警署及辦公室調查，期間左腳感痛楚「唔可以掂地」，需警員攙扶。他在還押期間仍需接受物理治療，現時膝蓋偶爾會感到痛楚，步姿及盤骨亦受影響。
10 Jun 2025法庭線#6887
涉未經授權助鄒家成寄投訴信罪成 助理律師向終院申上訴許可
In May 2023, Owen Chow Ka-shing, who was remanded in custody in the “47-person case”, was alleged to have sent, through a lawyer and without authorisation, a complaint letter to the Office of The Ombudsman. The letter complained that the Correctional Services Department had damaged and refused two Buddhist books sent in by his relatives and friends. Chow and a female lawyer were convicted of “taking an unauthorised article out of prison”. Chow was sentenced to three days’ imprisonment and the lawyer was fined $1,800. The two appealed. High Court Judge Cheung Wai-ling upheld the convictions but changed Chow’s sentence to the same $1,800 fine. The latest entry on the Court of Final Appeal website shows that the lawyer involved has applied for leave to appeal to the top court. The Judiciary’s website does not yet show a hearing date.
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，但改判鄒同樣罰款 1,800 元。
終審法院網頁最新顯示，涉案律師已向終院提出上訴許可申請。司法機構網頁暫未顯示聆訊日期。
9 Jun 2025法庭線#6882
反恐第二案｜首被告供稱被警員打傷眼 控方引醫療報告指沒受創 被告否認誣捏
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in an MTR train carriage at Lo Wu. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Lots” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, while one other person was charged with “attempting to manufacture explosives”. All eight pleaded not guilty, and the trial at the High Court entered its 112th day on Monday (9th).
The first defendant, Ho Cheuk Wai, previously testified that he was subjected to physical force by police at a police station after his arrest, and that his forehead was knocked against the corner of a table, causing pain to his eye. The prosecution produced Ho’s medical report, which showed that he was taken to hospital after his arrest and that examinations found no damage to his vision, visual field or optic nerve, assessing that his eye had suffered no trauma. When Ho attended a follow-up appointment six months later, a narrowed visual field was found, but the doctor ruled out trauma as the cause. Ho confirmed the contents of the report but denied falsely claiming that police had injured his eye.
The prosecution also pointed out that Ho was injured in an assault while on remand two years after his arrest and sought medical attention for eye pain. It suggested that Ho had deliberately avoided mentioning the injury sustained in custody when giving evidence and had shifted responsibility for his eye injury onto the police by fabricating an allegation that they had assaulted him. Ho disagreed, stressing that the assault by a fellow inmate while on remand was unrelated to the present case. The prosecution completed nine days of cross-examination. The trial will continue on Tuesday.
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，周一（9 日）於高院踏入第 112 天審訊。
首被告何卓為早前供稱，他被捕後在警署內遭警員以武力對待，額角被撞落檯角致眼睛疼痛。控方展示何的醫療報告，顯示他在被捕後送院，檢查發現視力、視野、視神經等沒有受損，評估其眼睛沒受創傷；半年後何覆診時發現視野收窄，醫生排除是由創傷造成。何確認報告內容，但否認訛稱眼睛被警員打傷。
控方又指出，何被捕後兩年，在還押期間被打傷，因眼痛求診，質疑何作供時刻意避談還押時受傷，將眼睛受傷的責任推卸到警方，誣捏警方毆打他。何不同意，強調還押期間被囚友襲擊與本案無關。控方完成 9 天盤問，審訊周二續。
9 Jun 2025法庭線#6883
10.6灣仔｜兩男暴動無罪發還、罪成候判 1被告曾任李予信助理、李到場旁聽眼通紅
On 6 October 2019, the day after the anti-mask law took effect, netizens organised the “Rally Against Authoritarianism and the Emergency Law”. Five people, including a boy who was 15 at the time of the incident, were charged with rioting and were found not guilty after trial. The Court of Appeal allowed the Department of Justice’s appeal, quashed the acquittals and remitted the case for reconsideration by the trial court. The two defendants reopened their defence cases and gave evidence. On Monday (9th), the District Court found them guilty. They were remanded until the 25th of this month for sentencing together with three others who had pleaded guilty earlier.
The defendant, now 31, was formerly an assistant to Yue Shun Lee. He raised a thumb towards the public gallery, while Yue Shun Lee also attended the hearing and waved to him. Lee left the court with reddened eyes. Acting Judge Ko Wai-hung rejected the two men’s respective claims that they had gone to buy a birthday present for the defendant’s mother and that they had overslept while travelling by vehicle, criticising the evidence as contrary to common sense and difficult to believe.
The judge said that although he did not accept a police officer’s evidence that he had seen the boy throw a petrol bomb, he found that the boy and the other defendant had remained at the scene. The only and irresistible inference was that they had bolstered the crowd’s presence and encouraged and supported the other rioters.
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、出庭作供，周一（9 日）在區域法院被裁定罪成，與早前認罪的 3 人一併押至本月 25 日判刑。
現年 31 歲的被告曾任李予信的助理，他向旁聽席高舉拇指，李予信亦有到場旁聽，向對方揮手。李離開法院時雙眼通紅。暫委法官高偉雄拒絕接納兩人分別供稱，到場購母親生日禮物及乘車睡過頭，批評供詞不符常理、難以相信。
官指，雖然不接納警員稱目睹男生投擲汽油彈，但認為他與另一被告逗留現場，唯一及無可抗拒的推論，是壯大人群聲勢，鼓勵、支持其他暴動者。
6 Jun 2025法庭線#6877
反恐第二案｜首被告供稱被捕後遭警員打胸口、踩下體 控方指細節與醫療報告不符
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in a Lo Wu MTR train carriage. The Telegram channel “九十二籤” 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 at the High Court entered its 111th day on Friday (the 6th).
The first defendant Ho Cheuk Wai earlier testified that police officers used force against him inside a police station after his arrest. During cross-examination, the prosecution pointed out that after Ho was taken to hospital that day, he told a doctor that he had been assaulted by four to six police officers, but testified in court that only two officers had used force. The prosecution said his accounts in the medical report and in his testimony were fabricated and exaggerated. Ho disagreed.
The prosecution also said Ho had never told the doctor that police officers had stamped on his genitals, and questioned whether it had “never happened”. Ho explained that when he saw the doctor, his headache was troubling him more, and “(so) I forgot to tell the doctor about (the stamping on my genitals).” The case continues next Monday.
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（6 日）於高院踏入第 111 天審訊。
首被告何卓為早前供稱，他被捕後在警署內遭警員以武力對待。控方盤問時指出，當日何送院後，向醫生表示遭 4 至 6 名警員襲擊，惟於庭上卻供稱只有兩名警員動手，指他於醫療報告和庭上的證供均是虛構和誇大。何不同意。
控方亦指，何從未向醫生提及遭警員踩下體一事，質疑是「從來冇發生」。何則解釋見醫生時他感到比較辛苦的是頭痛，「（所以）忘記咗同醫生講（踩下體）呢件事。」案件下周一續。
5 Jun 2025集誌社#6871
嶺大學生會｜警拘四人 兩幹事被指涉嫌挪用$ 90 萬會費還個人卡數等 重案組入大學校園搜證
Four current and former Lingnan University Student Union office-bearers were arrested by the crime unit yesterday (the 4th) on suspicion of theft and conspiracy to commit theft. Police said two current office-bearers allegedly deposited about $900,000 in Student Union funds into their personal accounts to pay personal credit-card bills for entertainment, dining, air tickets and other expenses. Crime unit officers entered student dormitories on the Lingnan University campus today (the 5th) to search for evidence. Lingnan University said it was looking into the matter and would cooperate with the police investigation.
嶺南大學學生會四現任及前任幹事，昨（4日）被重案組拘捕，四人被指涉嫌盜竊及串謀盜竊。警方指兩名現任幹事，涉嫌將學生會約 90 萬元款項，存入自己的戶口，用作償還個人娛樂、飲食、機票等卡數。重案組探員今（5）日進入嶺大校園的學生宿舍搜證。嶺大表示正了解事件，會配合警方調查。
4 Jun 2025法庭線#6869
7.1立會暴動案｜王宗堯、孫曉嵐等9人提上訴 排期12.16聆訊
In the July 1 Legislative Council riot case, four people, including Wong Chung-yiu, were convicted of rioting after trial, while eight others in the same case pleaded guilty before the trial began. The 12 defendants were sentenced to between four years and seven months and six years and 10 months in prison. Wong Chung-yiu, former president of the HKU Students’ Union Hiu Laam Suen and seven others subsequently filed appeals.
七一立法會暴動案，王宗堯等 4 人審訊後被裁定暴動罪成，同案 8 人則於開審前承認暴動罪，12 人分別判囚 4 年 7 個月至 6 年 10 個月。王宗堯、港大學生會前會長孫曉嵐等 9 人先後提上訴。
司法機構網頁顯示，上訴庭將於 12 月 16 日開庭處理定罪和刑罰上訴許可申請，預料需時兩天。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
