12 Mar 2025法庭線#4623
反恐第二案｜首被告被指發送試爆炸藥片段 辯方指可能轉自其他群組
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in a Lo Wu MTR train carriage. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Lots” later 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 68th day on Wednesday (12th).
A police sergeant from the Cybercrime Bureau continued to be cross-examined by the defence as a Telegram expert witness. The first defendant was accused of sending a clip showing explosives being test-detonated at a unit in Wang Chong Fong. The defence focused on the possibility that the clip had come from another group and that the first defendant had merely forwarded it.
The witness agreed that the clip could have been forwarded, but said that if so, the police would mark it as “forwarded” in the evidence submitted to the court. The defence then pointed out that more than 1,000 messages had no such marking and questioned whether the police would not mark them. The witness disagreed. The trial will continue on Thursday.
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（12 日）於高院踏入第 68 天審訊。
網罪科警長繼續以 Telegram 專家證人接受辯方盤問。首被告被指發送在涉案宏創方單位試爆炸藥的片段，辯方關注，片段可能是來自其他群組，而首被告只是轉發。
證人同意，指片段可以是轉發，但指若是如此，警方在呈堂資料會標註為「轉發」。辯方再指逾千個訊息都沒相關標註，質疑警方不會標註出來。證人否認。審訊周四續。
12 Mar 2025法庭線#4624
反恐首案認無牌管槍男子 就管彈簧刀另案加監5個月提刑期上訴
Chan Yuk-lung, who admitted last year to unlicensed possession of firearms and ammunition in the “first terrorism case” and was sentenced to nine years in prison, admitted in February this year to possessing a flick knife in a separate case and had his sentence increased by five months. High Court records show that Chan lodged an appeal against the sentence in the flick-knife case on Tuesday (11th). No hearing date has yet been set.
去年在「反恐首案」承認無牌管有槍械及彈藥、被判囚 9 年的被告陳玉龍，今年 2 月在另案承認管有彈簧刀，被加監 5 個月。高院資料顯示，陳於周二（11 日）就彈簧刀案提出刑期上訴，暫未有聆訊日期。
11 Mar 2025法庭線#4619
被指與「星火」有關 男子被控洗黑錢約60萬元囚16月 法庭頒令充公約10.8萬元
Police arrested three men and one woman in December 2019 on suspicion of money laundering, alleging that they were linked to Spark Alliance. One of the men, now aged 22, was subsequently charged with laundering about HK$600,000 through a bank account. He denied the charge but was convicted after trial and sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment. The case returned to court on Tuesday (11th) for consideration of a forfeiture order.
The prosecution applied to forfeit a total of HK$108,000, comprising the balance in the defendant’s bank account and cash. The defence said the cash was being held by police and the bank account had been frozen, and that police would transfer the amount to the government for forfeiture. Acting District Judge Ko Wai-hung formally made the forfeiture order and urged police to act as soon as possible.
警方於 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，被判囚 16 個月。案件周二（11 日）再開庭處理沒收令。
控方申請，充公被告銀行戶口結餘連同現金共 10.8 萬元。辯方透露現金正由警方保管，戶口亦被凍結，警方會將金額轉交政府充公。區院暫委法官高偉雄正式頒下沒收令，另敦促警方盡快行動。
11 Mar 2025法庭線#4620
逃犯條例｜「特權法案」朱凱廸陳志全加監7及20天 林卓廷不認罪 陳服刑期間母離世
Three former Legislative Council members—Chu Hoi-dick, Lam Cheuk-ting and Chan Chi-chuen—who are serving sentences in the “47-person case”, appeared at West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Tuesday (11th) in connection with three cases alleging violations of the Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance involving clashes during Legislative Council meetings from 2019 to 2020. Chu and Chan pleaded guilty and were sentenced to 14 and 32 days’ imprisonment respectively. As both are serving sentences in the “47-person case”, the magistrate ordered parts of the sentences to run concurrently, meaning they effectively added 7 and 20 days respectively. Lam pleaded not guilty, and the trial was adjourned to September.
In mitigation, the defence said that Chan’s mother, whom he “loved dearly”, had died while he was imprisoned. Although the Correctional Services Department made arrangements for him to see her once before her death, Chan regretted that he could not be by her side when she died.
In sentencing Chu and Chan in the two cases respectively—the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance Bills Committee’s “twin meetings” case and the Legislative Council foul-water-splashing case—Acting Chief Magistrate Cheng Nim-chi said the cases did not involve extremely serious violence. However, the Legislative Council was a place for deliberation, where views had to be expressed peacefully, and the conduct of the two defendants could not be permitted. Their actions were also clearly politically motivated, resulting in the suspension or termination of meetings that should have continued.
正就「47 人案」服刑的 3 名前立法會議員朱凱廸、林卓廷及陳志全，周二（11 日）在西九龍裁判法院，就著 3 宗被指違「特權法」、涉 2019 至 2020 年的立法會會議期間衝突案件應訊。朱凱廸及陳志全認罪，判囚 14 天及 32 天，考慮 2 人正就「47 人案」服刑，官指部分刑期可同期執行，可視為加監 7 天及 20 天；林卓廷則不認罪，押後 9 月審訊。
辯方求情時提及，陳志全服刑期間，他「好錫」的母親不幸過身，雖獲懲教通融而在臨終前見到最後一面，但陳對過身當刻未能陪伴身旁抱憾。
署理主任裁判官鄭念慈判刑時，就朱、陳分別涉及的 2 案，即逃犯條例法委會「鬧雙胞」、「立會潑臭水案」指，案件不涉非常嚴重武力，但議會是議事地方，要和平表達，不容許兩名被告所作所為，二人行為亦顯然出於政治目的，致應有的會議暫停或終止。
11 Mar 2025法庭線#4621
陳虹秀8.31暴動案重審罪成 官指叫喊對警失實指控、為示威者撐腰 4月判刑
On 31 August 2019, social worker Chan Hung-sau was charged with rioting in Wan Chai. She was originally ruled to have no case to answer, but the Department of Justice won its appeal. Following a retrial, Chan was convicted at the District Court on Tuesday (11th) and remanded in custody immediately. The judge adjourned the case to April for mitigation and sentencing together with three co-defendants who pleaded guilty. Her case has lasted more than five and a half years to date (see chronology in the full article).
Chan was accused of shouting at police officers through a microphone at the time of the incident. Analysing what she shouted, the judge said she alleged that the officers’ actions that day were not a “major manhunt and major crackdown” and that they were “shooting at Hong Kong citizens”. As the police had not advanced at the time, the judge considered Chan’s remarks untrue and provocative, and said that, in her capacity as a social worker, she was “backing the protesters”. The judge inferred that Chan intended to participate in the riot and encouraged others to engage in conduct that disrupted public peace.
The defence argued that Chan had sought to ease the atmosphere at the scene through her own efforts. The judge rejected this, saying Chan had not urged the protesters to stop using violence or leave, and considered that she had “clearly taken the side of the assembled people confronting the police”. Dozens of relatives and friends, including Chan’s 70-year-old mother, attended the hearing. Before entering the detention room, Chan shouted towards the public gallery: “It’s nothing! Don’t worry—take good care of yourselves, okay?” Some relatives had red-rimmed eyes.
2019 年 8 月 31 日，社工陳虹秀被控在灣仔暴動，原獲裁定表證不成立，律政司上訴得直，案件經重審後，陳周二（11 日）在區院被裁定罪成、即時還押，官押後至 4 月求情及與同案 3 名認罪被告一同判刑。她的案件至今歷時逾 5 年半（見內文時序）。
陳被指案發時用咪向警員叫喊，官分析陳叫喊的內容，指她稱「你哋今日嘅行動唔係大追捕大追殺」、「向香港市民開槍」，但當時警方沒推進，認為陳的言論失實、具挑釁性，又指她以社工身分「為示威者撐腰」，推論陳有意圖參與暴動，鼓勵他人作出破壞社會安寧行為。
辯方力陳，陳望憑一己之力緩和現場氣氛，法官反駁指，陳沒勸喻示威者停止暴力及離開，認為她「明顯偏幫與警方對峙的集結人士」。數十親友，包括年屆 70 的陳母到庭旁聽，陳步入羈留室前向旁聽席高呼：「冇嘢！放心，照顧好自己呀下！」有親友雙眼通紅。
11 Mar 2025法庭線#4622
反修例暴動案至少12被告為社工或準社工 陳虹秀4人辯解到場履責 僅一人無罪
Social worker Chan Hung-sau was charged with rioting in Wan Chai on 31 August 2019. Following a retrial, she was found guilty at the District Court on Tuesday (11th) and remanded in custody the same day.
Courtline’s tally found that at least 12 defendants in anti-extradition bill riot cases were social workers or people studying social work to become social workers. Four of them, including Chan Hung-sau, argued that they had attended in their capacity as social workers to defuse police tensions, “pick up children” and provide emotional support. Only one was acquitted. The person’s supervisor testified that social workers would be assigned to work at the scene, were required to wear their social worker identity cards and could not wear black clothing, which was consistent with the defendant’s clothing when arrested.
The other three, including Chan Hung-sau, were found guilty. A review of the judgments showed that District Court judges inferred from conduct including wearing black clothing and loitering at the scene that the three intended to take part in the riot and assist and encourage protesters to commit acts that breached the peace. One of them was alleged to have acted as a “lookout”.
社工陳虹秀被控 2019 年 8 月 31 日在灣仔暴動一案，陳經重審，周二（11 日）在區院被裁定罪成，即日還押。
《法庭線》統計，至少 12 名反修例暴動案的被告為社工，或正修讀社工系的準社工；其中陳虹秀等 4 人的辯解是憑藉社工身分緩和警方情緒、到場「執仔」、情緒支援，僅一人獲裁無罪，其上司作供確認會指派社工到場工作，要掛社工證、不可穿黑衫，與被告被捕時衣著符合。
其餘 3 人包括陳虹秀則被裁定罪成。翻查判詞，區院法官據穿黑衣、在場徘徊等行為，推論 3 人有意圖參與暴動，協助及鼓勵示威者作出破壞社會安寧行為，其中一人被指充當「哨兵」。
10 Mar 2025法庭線#4616
9.29金鐘｜暴動罪成5人提刑罰上訴等 一人刑期上訴得直獲扣減3個月
During the “Global Anti-Totalitarian March” on 29 September 2019, clashes between police and protesters broke out in Admiralty. A total of 96 people were charged with rioting. In one case in which 12 people were convicted, five separately appealed against their convictions and sentences. The Court of Appeal handed down its judgment on Monday (10th), allowing one appellant’s sentence appeal and reducing his term from four years and three months to four years. It dismissed the other defendants’ appeals against their convictions and sentences.
One appellant argued that he had pleaded guilty earlier than the other defendants, but received a smaller guilty plea discount than those who pleaded guilty later because the trial judge said he had shown “extremely insufficient remorse”. The Court of Appeal noted that, although the defence submissions appeared to criticise the police for using unnecessary violence against the appellant, they did not seek to lessen his culpability, but merely pointed out that he had also been injured and sought a lighter sentence. The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had erred in finding that the appellant had shown “insufficient remorse” and granting him a smaller discount. It therefore allowed his sentence appeal and reduced his sentence by three months.
2019 年 9 月 29 日「全球反極權遊行」，金鐘爆發警民衝突，共 96 人被控暴動。其中一宗 12 人罪成的案件，當中 5 人分別就定罪及刑罰申請上訴。上訴庭周一（10 日）頒下判詞，裁定一人刑期上訴得直，由 4 年 3 個月改判 4 年；另駁回其餘被告的定罪及刑期上訴。
其中一名上訴人爭議，他較其他被告早認罪，卻因被原審指「悔意極為不足」，認罪扣減比其他較遲認罪的人少。上訴庭引述，雖然辯方求情時，看似在批評警方對上訴人使用不必要暴力，但沒有試圖減輕上訴人的罪責，只是指他亦有受傷，而希望減輕刑罰。上訴庭認為，原審官因而指上訴人「悔意不足」，給予較少的扣減屬犯錯，裁定他刑期上訴得直，減刑 3 個月。
10 Mar 2025法庭線#4617
反恐第二案｜網罪科警長以TG專家作供 指頻道擁有人、管理員可發帖
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in an MTR train carriage in 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 67th day on Monday (the 10th).
The prosecution called a Cyber Security and Technology Crime Bureau sergeant to testify as a Telegram expert. He said the owner of a Telegram channel can post messages and designate users as administrators, giving them permission to post and perform other functions. Unless the channel’s “sign messages” feature is enabled, posts will not carry the poster’s name. Telegram users can change their account names, but names cannot be duplicated by other users, while user IDs are unique. Different phones can also be used to log in to the same user account. The trial will continue on Wednesday.
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（10 日）於高院踏入第 67 天審訊。
控方傳召網罪科警長以 Telegram 專家身分作供，他供稱 Telegram 頻道的擁有人可以在頻道發帖文，亦可以設置用戶為管理員，並開放權限給管理員發帖等。而除非頻道開啟「簽署信息」功能，否則帖文不會署名；Telegram 用戶可自行更改帳戶名稱，但不能與其他用戶重複，而 ID 則是獨一無二。另外，不同電話可以登入同一個用戶使用。審訊周三續。
7 Mar 2025法庭線#4602
社民連街站遭票控 陳寶瑩等4人不認罪、4月開審 余煒彬涉另案待控辯呈交陳詞
League of Social Democrats chair Chan Po-ying, vice-chair Dickson Chau and Yu Wai-pan, among four people, were prosecuted by summons over alleged unlicensed fundraising and displaying posters or banners without permission at street stalls in Causeway Bay and Wan Chai between April and May 2023. All four pleaded not guilty. Their case was dealt with at a pre-trial review at the Eastern Magistrates’ Courts on Friday (7th). Yu is also charged with displaying posters without permission in Causeway Bay, and a pre-trial review for that case was held on the same day.
For the case involving the four defendants, the prosecution said police had filmed the street-stall activities on each occasion, so there would be video evidence. The footage would be played at trial, and the relevant police officers would be called to testify. An inspector would also be called as a QR-code expert witness to explain the operation of QR codes and related matters. The defendants said they might rely on human rights law in their submissions. Magistrate Minnie Lai Man Wat ordered a one-day trial on 29 April, with closing submissions on 30 April.
In the separate case involving Yu Wai-pan, the defendant requested disclosure of documents including the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department’s enforcement guidelines. The prosecution refused, citing public interest immunity (PII) (a Law 101 article). The magistrate ultimately ordered both sides to file written submissions and adjourned the case to 5 August for mention.
社民連主席陳寶瑩、副主席周嘉發和余煒彬等 4 人，被票控 2023 年 4 至 5 月在銅鑼灣及灣仔街站「無牌籌款」及「未經准許展示招貼或海報」。4 人不認罪，周五（7 日）在東區裁判法院處理審前覆核。余另涉在銅鑼灣未經准許展示海報，該案同日亦作審前覆核。
就 4 人案件，控方稱警方每次均有拍攝街站情況，故有錄影證供，屆時審訊時會播放片段，並傳召相關警員作供；另會傳召一名督察，作為二維碼專家證人作供，講解二維碼操作等。被告均稱陳詞時或會依賴人權法。裁判官屈麗雯下令，本案於 4 月 29 日作一天審訊，4 月 30 日結案陳詞。
至於余煒彬所涉的另案，他要求控方披露食環署的執法指引等文件，指控方以「公眾利益豁免權」（PII）（ 法律 101 文章）為由拒絕。官終下令雙方呈交書面陳詞，另保留在 8 月 5 日提訊。
7 Mar 2025法庭線#4603
《頭條新聞》案｜通訊局申上訴被拒兼付訟費 再向終院申上訴許可
In 2020, the Communications Authority ruled that some episodes of RTHK’s ‘Headliner’ had insulted the police. The Hong Kong Journalists Association and the RTHK Staff Union sought a judicial review of the decision and partly succeeded in 2021. The Communications Authority, the RTHK Staff Union and the Hong Kong Journalists Association each appealed against the parts of the judgment that went against them. The Court of Appeal earlier unanimously dismissed the Communications Authority’s appeal, while allowing the appeals by the union and the journalists’ association, and ordered the Communications Authority’s warning to be quashed.
The Communications Authority, dissatisfied with the decision, applied to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal, but the application was rejected. It has now formally applied to the Court of Final Appeal for leave to pursue a final appeal.
In response to enquiries from The Witness, the Communications Authority said that, having considered its legal advisers’ opinion, it had applied to the Court of Final Appeal for leave to appeal. As the case is currently in judicial proceedings, the authority would make no further comment.
通訊事務管理局 2020 年裁定港台《頭條新聞》有集數辱警，記協與港台工會提司法覆核挑戰決定，2021 年獲判部分勝訴。通訊局、港台工會與記協各就敗訴部分提上訴。上訴庭早前一致駁回通訊局上訴，工會、記協則上訴得直，上訴庭下令撤銷通訊局的警告。
通訊局不服決定，向上訴庭申請上訴至終審法院被拒，再正式向終院申終極上訴許可。
通訊局回覆《法庭線》查詢時指，經考慮法律顧問的意見，已向終院申請上訴許可。由於有關個案正處於司法程序，通訊局不會作出其他評論。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
