7 Mar 2025法庭線#4604
11.18油麻地｜青年暴動罪成囚5年上訴得直減刑3月 官指攜口罩手套與噴漆等有別
In November 2019, police surrounded protesters inside the Polytechnic University. A total of 213 people were accused of rioting in Yau Ma Tei in an attempt to “besiege Wei to rescue Zhao” by rescuing the protesters who were surrounded, and the cases were dealt with separately. A youth who was under 21 at the time of the incident was convicted after trial and sentenced to 60 months’ imprisonment. He appealed against his conviction and sentence, but leave was granted only in respect of the latter. The Court of Appeal earlier allowed the youth’s appeal and reduced his sentence by three months to four years and nine months.
The Court of Appeal handed down its judgment on Friday (the 7th), rejecting the appellant’s submission that he had not received an additional reduction on account of his age. The appellant also argued that three co-defendants in the same case had respectively possessed a laser pointer, spray paint and lighter fuel, whereas he had only possessed surgical masks and gloves, yet the trial judge had classified him as having medium culpability despite the substantial difference in their potential to cause harm.
The judges said it was “not unreasonable” for all the defendants to have been classified as having medium culpability. However, the trial court had classified them according to the nature of the objects rather than the relevant intent. “In terms of their potential destructive or lethal power, masks and gloves are obviously somewhat different from laser pointers, spray paint and lighter fuel.” The Court of Appeal therefore considered that the appellant’s sentence should be slightly lower than those of the three co-defendants.
2019 年 11 月，警方圍堵理大內示威者，213 人涉在油麻地以「圍魏救趙」，營救被圍堵的示威者，被控暴動，分成多案處理。案發時不足 21 歲青年經審訊後定罪，被判囚 60 個月。他提出定罪及刑期上訴，僅就後者獲批許可，上訴庭早前裁定青年上訴得直，減刑 3 個月至 4 年 9 個月。
上訴庭周五（7 日）頒下判詞，拒納上訴方指，上訴人沒有因年輕而獲得額外扣減。至於上訴方認為，同案 3 名被告分別攜有鐳射筆、噴漆和打火機燃料，但上訴人只是管有外科口罩和手套，卻被原審法官歸入中度罪責的類別，指潛在的傷害性而言有很大差別。
法官指出，這些被告「全部被冠以中度罪責也是無可厚非的」，但問題是原審沒有以相關的意圖歸類，而是以物件性質歸類，「就潛在的破壞或殺傷力而言，口罩和手套又明顯與雷（鐳）射筆、噴漆和打火機燃料有些分別」，故上訴庭認為，上訴人的刑期應比同案 3 名被告略低。
7 Mar 2025法庭線#4606
反恐第二案｜消防安全管工確認 宏創方搜出滅火筒經改裝 配合打火機可噴火
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in an MTR Lo Wu-bound train carriage. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Divination Sticks” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, while one was charged with attempting to manufacture explosives. All eight pleaded not guilty, and the trial at the High Court entered its 66th day on Friday (the 7th).
Five fire extinguishers were found in two units at Wang Cheong Fang in Tai Kok Tsui. The prosecution called a fire safety foreman to testify as an expert witness. The expert confirmed that the extinguishers had been modified, filled with suspected petrol, and fitted with modified metal nozzles. Police extracted several videos from the phone of the second defendant, Lee Ka-ban, showing someone using a fire extinguisher to spray flames.
The expert believed that the extinguishers in the videos had been modified. He estimated that someone sprayed petrol from an extinguisher while using a lighter, causing flames to be emitted from it. The trial will resume 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（7 日）於高院踏入第 66 天審訊。
涉案大角咀宏創方兩個單位，搜出 5 支滅火筒。控方傳召消防安全管工以專家證人身分作供，專家確認滅火筒經改裝，注入疑似汽油，改裝金屬噴嘴。警方從次被告李嘉濱的電話，擷取多段顯示有人用滅火筒噴火的影片。
專家認為片中的滅火筒經過改裝，估計有人一邊用滅火筒噴出汽油，一邊使用打火機，令滅火筒噴出火焰。審訊下周一續。
6 Mar 2025法庭線#4597
支聯會資料案鄒幸彤3人終極勝訴 終院指遮報告礙公平審訊 兩下級法院均錯誤
In the first case under the implementation rules of the National Security Law, the Court of Final Appeal unanimously ruled on Thursday (the 6th) that Chow Hang-tung, Tang Ngok Kwan and Hon Kwong Tsui had succeeded in their final appeal in the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China refusal-to-provide-information case, quashing their convictions and sentences. Chow smiled and made the “V” hand gesture before leaving the court. Tang said outside the court that “justice is in the hearts of the people.”
The top court ruled that the Department of Justice had to prove that the Alliance was in fact a “foreign agent”. The extensive redaction of the National Security Department’s investigation report on the grounds of public interest immunity meant that the defendants could not know the basis of the prosecution’s evidence, depriving them of their right to a fair trial.
The top court also said that trial magistrate Law Tak-chuen had stressed that, to safeguard national security “effectively”, it was sufficient for the police to have reasonable grounds to believe that the Alliance was a “foreign agent”. High Court judge Lisa Wong, who heard the appeal, went further by ruling that the defendants could not challenge the validity of the police notice in a criminal trial. However, both rulings by the lower courts were erroneous.
首宗《國安法》實施細則案件「支聯會拒交資料案」，終審法院周四（6 日）一致裁定鄒幸彤、鄧岳君、徐漢光終極上訴得直，撤銷定罪及刑罰。鄒離庭前笑著舉起「V」字手勢；鄧在法院外稱「公道自在人心」。
終院裁定，律政司必須證明支聯會事實上是「外國代理人」，而引「公眾利益豁免權」大幅遮蓋國安處調查報告，令被告無法得知控方舉證的論據，剝奪公平審訊的權利。
終院又指，原審裁判官羅德泉強調為「有效」維護國安，警方有合理理由相信支聯會是「外國代理人」已是足夠，而審理上訴的高院法官黎婉姫則更進一步，裁斷被告不能在刑事審訊中挑戰警方通知書的有效性，但兩個下級法院的裁決均為錯誤。
6 Mar 2025法庭線#4600
反恐第二案｜EOD警司指被搜出原材料有「無害用途」 惟土製炸彈常用平常材料
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” later admitted 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 65th day on Thursday (6th).
Lo Ping-shan, a superintendent with the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Bureau (EOD), continued to testify as a prosecution expert witness. He said the radio-controlled explosive device involved in the Lo Wu station bombing was poorly designed and “not very likely” to explode, but was capable of causing a deflagration. A similar unfinished device was also found in a unit at Wang Chong Fong. An unassembled device was found at the second defendant’s residence, but its power was limited by the plastic tubing.
The expert report also said that polyurethane resin, iron oxide powder and icing sugar found at the eighth defendant’s residence could all be used to make bombs. The superintendent agreed that the materials had many “harmless uses”, but said that homemade bombs were generally made using materials that appeared ordinary. The trial continues 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（6 日）於高院踏入第 65 天審訊。
爆炸品處理課（EOD）警司盧秉善續以控方專家證人身分作供，供稱羅湖站爆炸案中的無線電遙控爆炸裝置設計欠佳，「不太可能」爆炸，但足以造成爆燃，而在宏創方單位亦找到相似的未完成裝置；次被告住所則搜出未組裝好的裝置，惟受膠管限制，威力有限。
專家報告又指，從第八被告住所搜出的聚氨酯樹脂、氧化鐵粉、糖霜等均可用於製造炸彈。警司同意，上述材料有許多「無害的用途」，但指一般製造土製炸彈，都會用看似平常的材料。審訊周五續。
5 Mar 2025法庭線#4593
反恐第二案｜EOD警司：明愛醫院裝置可能為爆燃 羅湖站兩裝置爆破可能性極少
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Hospital and aboard an MTR train at Lo Wu Station. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Lots” later 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, and the trial at the High Court entered its 64th day on Wednesday (the 5th). An Organised Crime and Triad Bureau officer who identified the fifth defendant, Yeung Yee-sze, from CCTV footage admitted under cross-examination that he had mistakenly copied parts of his identification evidence concerning another defendant into his statement. The defence suggested that he had in fact been unable to identify Yeung, which the officer denied.
The prosecution’s expert witness, Superintendent Lo Ping-sin of the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Bureau, said the improvised incendiary device found at Caritas Medical Centre had not been deliberately sealed. He estimated that it was intended to cause a deflagration rather than an explosion, but said it was still capable of causing death.
As for the two radio-controlled improvised explosive devices found at Lo Wu Station, Lo said that because they were not precisely constructed and had not been sealed, “the likelihood of causing a blast was extremely low”. However, he said that if the two devices had detonated together, they would have been capable of causing multiple casualties.
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（5 日）於高院踏入第 64 天審訊。
在閉路電視片段認出第五被告楊怡斯的 O 記警員，在盤問下承認錯將辨認另一被告的供詞「搬字過紙」；辯方質疑他根本認不出楊，警員否認。
控方專家證人、爆炸品處理課警司盧秉善指，明愛醫院的土製燃燒裝置無刻意密封，估計是用作爆燃而非爆炸，但仍有能力造成死亡；羅湖站的兩個無線電土製爆炸裝置，因非嚴格製造、沒密封，「造成爆破的可能極少」，但若一同引爆足以造成多人傷亡。審訊周四續。
4 Mar 2025法庭線#4591
反恐第二案｜警員從CCTV片認出第五被告前往車站 時間為羅湖站爆炸案發生前
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in an MTR train carriage at Lo Wu. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Divination Sticks” later 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, and the trial at the High Court entered its 63rd day on Tuesday (the 4th).
The prosecution continued to call the police officer responsible for viewing the CCTV footage in the case. He testified that he identified the fifth defendant Yeung Yee-sze in the footage based on appearance, build, clothing and gait, among other features. He said that on the day of the Lo Wu station bombing, Yang travelled from near his residence to Sheung Shui station to board a train. After arriving at Lo Wu station, he went to the checkpoint, returned to Lo Wu station without leaving Hong Kong, and then travelled to Mong Kok station.
The prosecution presented Telegram records from around the same time. They showed that “想和你通渠”, allegedly belonging to the first defendant, asked “Bombed?” at around the time of the Lo Wu station bombing. “叉雞飯”, allegedly belonging to Yeung Yee-sze, replied, “Can’t hear it,” and said, “I didn’t bring my Home Return Permit; I’m leaving now.” 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，周二（4 日）於高院踏入第 63 天審訊。
控方繼續傳召負責觀看涉案閉路電視片段的警員作供，他供稱在片段中，從外型、身型、衣著、步姿等認出第五被告楊怡斯，指楊在羅湖站爆炸案當天，從住所附近前往上水站登上列車，到羅湖站後前往關口，沒有離境便折返羅湖站，然後前往旺角站。
控方展示在相若時間的一段 Telegram 紀錄，顯示被指首被告的「想和你通渠」在羅湖站爆炸案發生的相若時間，問「Bombed？」被指是楊怡斯的「叉雞飯」回答「聽唔到」，又指「冇帶回鄉證依家走」。審訊周三續。
3 Mar 2025法庭線#4588
反恐第二案｜第五被告家中搜出硫酸 辯方稱是通渠水、控方同意作為承認事實
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Hospital and in an MTR train carriage at Lo Wu. The Telegram channel “Gau Sap Yi Cim” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, while the remaining person was charged with attempting to make explosives. All eight pleaded not guilty, and the trial at the High Court entered its 62nd day on Monday (the 3rd).
The prosecution called an Organised Crime and Triad Bureau (O Division) police officer who arrested the fifth defendant Yeung Yee-sze at home. He testified that a “Liberate Hong Kong” flag, an American flag, a gas mask, sulphuric acid and saline solution, among other items, were found at Yeung’s residence. During cross-examination, the defence pointed out that the bottle containing the sulphuric acid was labelled “drain cleaner”. The prosecution said it could agree to admit this as an agreed fact.
The prosecution also called another O Division officer, who testified that he identified the defendant in CCTV footage by the person’s hairstyle, eyes, eyebrows, clothing, build and walking style. The defence had earlier denied that the defendant appeared in any of the footage.
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（3 日）於高院踏入第 62 天審訊。
控方傳召上門拘捕第五被告楊怡斯的有組織罪案及三合會調查科（O 記）警員，他供稱在楊的住所搜出「光時」旗、美國國旗、防毒面具、硫酸、生理鹽水等物。辯方盤問時，指檢取的硫酸瓶身標示為「通渠水」，控方指可以同意作為承認事實。
控方亦傳召另一 O 記警員，供稱從 CCTV 片段中，藉髮型、眼、眉、衣著、身型、步姿認出被告；辯方於早前，則否認有任何一條片段拍攝到被告。
3 Mar 2025法庭線#4590
前中大學生會長認煽惑投白票 提上訴爭議限制言論自由被駁回 官：設限制為保公平
Former Chinese University of Hong Kong student union president So Tsun-fung was accused of reposting online in 2021 a post by former Legislative Council member Hui Chi-fung advocating casting blank ballots in elections. The Independent Commission Against Corruption charged So Tsun-fung with violating the Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Conduct) Ordinance. The defence challenged the constitutionality of the charge, but after the magistrate ruled that it was constitutional, So Tsun-fung changed the plea to guilty and was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment, suspended for 18 months.
So Tsun-fung lodged an appeal by way of case stated, arguing that the charge imposed an unreasonable restriction on freedom of expression. In earlier submissions, So Tsun-fung’s side said the case involved freedom of expression and that any restriction had to serve a legitimate purpose, but there was no evidence that calling on others not to vote or to cast blank ballots would interfere with elections.
Acting Judge Yao Huen-chi handed down his judgment at the High Court on Monday (the 3rd), ruling that the restriction served the legitimate purpose of ensuring that elections were fair and open, and agreeing that the restriction imposed was necessary. The judge also said that inciting people to vote against a candidate would not only render the electoral process ineffective, but would also affect the smooth transition of popular representation in the legislature. He ruled that the trial magistrate had not erred in finding that the relevant provisions did not infringe the appellant’s freedom of expression or right to equality before the law, and dismissed the appeal.
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》。辯方爭議控罪合憲性，而裁判官裁定合憲後，蘇改為認罪，判囚兩個月、緩刑 18 個月。
蘇以案件呈述方式提上訴，爭議控罪不合理限制言論自由。蘇一方早前陳詞時指，本案涉及言論自由，如要設限必須有合理目的，惟沒有證據證明，呼籲他人不投票或投白票會干擾選舉。
暫委法官姚勳智周一（3 日）於高院頒下判詞，指限制設有合法目的，以確保選舉公平公開，並同意所施加的限制是必要的。官又指，煽動投反對票，不但令選舉過程變得無作用，也會影響議會民意代表順利過渡，指原審裁判官裁定相關條文並無侵犯上訴人的言論自由，及法律面前的平等權利，沒有出錯，駁回上訴。
28 Feb 2025法庭線#4583
反恐第二案｜爆炸品處理課警司：檢獲物屬低性能炸藥 兩單位製炸藥、儲材料
In early 020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in a Lo Wu MTR train carriage. The Telegram channel “Gau Sap Yi Cim” later 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, and the trial at the High Court entered its 61st day on Friday (the 28th). A superintendent of the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Bureau said footage apparently showing someone testing explosives indicated that the explosive was flash powder made by mixing potassium nitrate and aluminium powder. He said it had high destructive power and, if properly sealed, could cause death when ignited. Based on observations at the scene and the exhibits, the superintendent believed Unit 503 was used to make explosives and Room 1008 was used to store raw materials, noting that the two would generally be kept separate for safety reasons. Several defence barristers pointed out that the sulphur, drain cleaner, sodium chlorate and electronic matches found in the premises also had uses other than making explosives. The superintendent said many explosive raw materials were common household products, and agreed that electronic matches were commonly used to ignite commercial fireworks. The trial will resume on Monday.
020 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（28 日）於高院踏入第 61 天審訊。
爆炸品處理課（EOD）警司指，疑有人測試炸藥的片段顯示，炸藥屬混合硝酸鉀和鋁粉的「閃粉」，其破壞程度高，妥善封口後燃點可導致死亡；警司據現場觀察、證物，認為涉案 503 單位是用作製炸藥，1008 室則是原材料倉，指一般為了安全兩者會分開。
辯方多名大狀指出，涉案單位搜出的硫磺、通渠水、氯酸納、電子火柴，均有製作炸藥以外的用途。警司指，許多炸藥的原材料都是常見家居用品，另同意電子火柴常用來點燃商業用的煙花。審訊下周一續。
27 Feb 2025法庭線#4572
反恐第二案｜警司以爆炸品專家身分作供 稱宏創方單位有足夠配件組炸彈
In early 2020, explosives were found at Caritas Medical Centre and in an MTR train compartment at Lo Wu. The Telegram channel “Ninety-Two Divinations” subsequently claimed responsibility. Seven people were charged with offences under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, while one other was charged with “attempting to manufacture explosives”. All eight pleaded not guilty. The trial at the High Court entered its 60th day on Thursday (27th), with the prosecution calling a superintendent from the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Bureau to testify as an expert witness.
The superintendent testified that no assembled explosive devices were found in units 503 and 1008 at Hung Cheung Fong in Tai Kok Tsui. However, the units contained deflagrating explosives, fuses, circuit boards, electronic matches and other components that could be assembled into bombs. The deflagrating explosive seized from one of the units was not sealed and would only burn, but could explode once sealed.
The superintendent also said the deflagrating explosive mixed with aluminium powder in Unit 503 had the capacity to cause death or serious bodily injury. The deflagrating explosive in Unit 1008, which did not contain aluminium powder, could cause serious destruction within 1.5 metres but did not have the capacity to cause death. The trial 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（27 日）於高院踏入第 60 天審訊。控方傳召爆炸品處理課警司，以專家證人身分作供。
警司供稱在大角咀宏創方 503 及 1008 室內，沒有組裝好的爆炸裝置，但分別有爆燃炸藥、引信、電路板、電子火柴等配件，可以組裝成炸彈；其中檢取的爆燃炸藥未密封，只會燃燒，但密封後可以爆炸。
警司又指，503 室混合鋁粉的爆燃炸藥，有能力造成死亡或嚴重人身傷害；而 1008 室的沒有加入鋁粉的爆燃炸藥，則可在 1.5 米內造成嚴重破壞，但不具備造成死亡的能力。審訊周五續。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
