26 Jun 2025法庭線#6952
8.25葵涌｜3人認串謀非法集結囚25至30月 較同案量刑起點高21月、提上訴被拒
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.
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。
26 Jun 2025法庭線#6954
反恐第二案｜第四被告質疑呈堂TG對話列表曾被修改 控方：被告一方從沒提爭議
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.
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。
26 Jun 2025法庭線#6955
咬斷警手指判囚5年半 杜啟華獲釋後須守監管令 申赴英讀法律被拒提司法覆核
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.
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。
25 Jun 2025法庭線#6950
郭卓堅被指破產期間賭博、另漏報逾9萬元收入 遭延長破產期1.5年
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.
「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。
25 Jun 2025法庭線#6951
10.6灣仔｜5人暴動無罪發還原審 3人認罪2人重啟案情判罪成 判監2年至3年2周
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.
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。
24 Jun 2025法庭線#6940
《立場》案｜林紹桐煽動罪成 不服定罪提上訴 排期2026年9月聆訊
In the case in which Stand News was charged with conspiracy to publish seditious publications, former editor-in-chief Chung Pui-kuen was sentenced to 21 months’ imprisonment in September 2024. Acting editor-in-chief Lam Siu-tung, owing to his health condition, was sentenced to a term that allowed for immediate release after time spent on remand was deducted, and was released in court. Lam Siu-tung, who does not accept the conviction, earlier lodged an appeal. According to the Judiciary’s website, the Court of Appeal will hear the application for leave to appeal against the conviction on September 22, 2026. The hearing is expected to last three days.
《立場新聞》被控「串謀發布煽動刊物」案，前總編輯鍾沛權於 2024 年 9 月被判監禁 21 個月，署任總編輯林紹桐則因健康情況，獲判處扣除還押日子後、可即時釋放的刑期，當庭獲釋。
林紹桐不服定罪，早前提出上訴。根據司法機構網頁，上訴庭將於 2026 年 9 月 22 日開庭處理定罪上訴許可申請，預料審期 3 日。
24 Jun 2025法庭線#6942
23條首宗司法覆核｜馬俊文不獲提早釋放覆核上訴被駁回 判詞：不存在剝奪轉介權
Ma Chun-man, nicknamed “Second-generation Captain America”, was convicted of incitement to secession and sentenced to five years in prison after being accused of repeatedly shouting slogans advocating Hong Kong independence. He was originally due to be released early in March this year after remission for good conduct, but under the new arrangements following the implementation of Article 23, he was not granted early release and will serve his sentence until November this year at the latest.
After losing his judicial review, he appealed. The Court of Appeal dismissed the application on Tuesday (the 24th). The judgment said the schedules to the Prisoners (Release under Supervision) Ordinance did not cover offences endangering national security. The Ordinance was amended after Article 23 took effect to apply to national security offenders. Therefore, the court said, there was no basis for the appellant’s claim that the implementation of Article 23 raised the threshold for national security assessments and deprived Ma of a statutory right to have his case referred to the Prisoners (Release under Supervision) Board for consideration.
In response to the appellant’s argument that the definition of national security was vague, the Court of Appeal said the definition was broad but neither unclear nor arbitrary. The court said the broad definition provided flexibility, adding that the concept of national security could change over time “to address existing and new threats facing national security”. The judge also ordered Ma to pay the legal costs.
綽號「第二代美國隊長」的馬俊文，被指多次叫喊港獨口號，「煽動分裂國家」罪成判囚 5 年。他原定今年 3 月在行為良好減刑下提早獲釋，惟在「23 條」新安排下，未能提早釋放，最遲延至今年 11 月刑滿。
他提出司法覆核敗訴後再上訴，上訴庭周二（24 日）駁回申請。判詞指，《監管釋囚條例》內的附表，並無涵蓋危害國安罪行，至「23 條」生效後，《條例》經修訂才適用於國安犯，故不存在上訴方稱，「23 條」生效增國安評估門檻，使馬失法定轉介監管釋囚委員會考慮的權利。
就上訴方指國安定義模糊，上訴庭反駁，國安定義雖然廣泛，但非含糊不清或恣意。上訴庭指，廣泛定義提供靈活性，又指國安概念可隨時間轉變，「以應對國家安全面臨現有和新的威脅」。官另下令馬支付訟費。
24 Jun 2025法庭線#6944
何君堯控郭榮鏗、林卓廷、毛孟靜誹謗 官准何依賴林暴動定罪 另准林押後待暴動上訴結果
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.
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。
24 Jun 2025法庭線#6945
涉未經授權助鄒家成寄投訴信罪成判罰款 助理律師向高院申上訴至終院許可證明書
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.
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
24 Jun 2025法庭線#6946
蘇浚鋒煽惑投白票案 高院拒批上訴至終院證明書 判詞：考慮歷史背景認為控罪合理
Former Chinese University of Hong Kong Students’ Union president So Tsun-fung was accused of reposting online in 2021 a message by former Legislative Council member Ted Hui Chi-fung calling on voters to cast blank ballots in an election. He was prosecuted by the Independent Commission Against Corruption for violating the Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Conduct) Ordinance. After the trial magistrate ruled that the charge was constitutional, So changed his plea to guilty and was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment, suspended for 18 months. His subsequent appeal was dismissed. On Tuesday (24th), Deputy High Court Judge Yiu Fun-chi handed down reasons for his decision last month refusing to grant So a certificate to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
The judgment stated that the appellant argued the court had wrongly assumed that inciting others not to vote or to cast invalid ballots would be detrimental to an election. He relied on overseas case law suggesting that prohibiting citizens from boycotting an election amounted to an unreasonable restriction on freedom of expression. He also argued that persuading others was at the core of freedom of expression, and that criminalising the advocacy of a lawful political viewpoint would bring no benefit to society.
The Department of Justice, meanwhile, reiterated that the defendant’s conduct could exert improper pressure on voters’ freedom to vote. It also argued that there had been loopholes in the electoral system and that, if they had not been rectified in a timely manner, they could have obstructed the principles of “patriots administering Hong Kong” and “One Country, Two Systems”, thereby seriously undermining Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability.
The court ultimately held that the charge in this case was, without doubt, manifestly reasonable. It noted that, when the offence was introduced, Hong Kong had experienced serious unrest and social incidents that endangered the constitutional and political order. This led the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress to improve Hong Kong’s electoral system, followed by local legislation enacted by the Legislative Council after extensive debate and discussion.
前中大學生會會長蘇浚鋒，被指 2021 年在網上轉載前立法會議員許智峯倡選舉投白票帖文，被廉署起訴違反《選舉（舞弊及非法行為）條例》。蘇在原審裁判官裁定控罪合憲後改為認罪，判囚兩個月、緩刑 18 個月，其後提上訴被駁回。高院暫委法官姚勳智周二（24 日）就其上月，拒向蘇發出上訴至終院證明書之決定頒判詞。
判詞提到，上訴方認為法庭錯誤假設，煽惑他人不投票或投無效票會不利選舉，但海外案例指禁止市民杯葛選舉，屬不合理限制言論自由，又認為說服他人是言論自由的核心，若視宣揚合法政治觀點為犯罪，不會為社會帶來效益。
律政司一方則重申，被告行為可能對選民自由投票施加不當壓力，又指選舉制度有漏洞，若不及時糾正，或礙「愛國者治港」、「一國兩制」，嚴重損害香港繁榮安定。
法庭最終裁定，本案控罪毫無疑問是顯然合理的，因控罪制定時，本港經歷了危及憲制、政治秩序的嚴重動亂和社會事件，引致全國人大常委會為本港完善選舉制度，再由本地立法會經充分辯論和討論制定立法。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
