2 Aug 2024法庭線#3876
支聯會拒交資料案｜終院批出終極上訴許可 判詞透露鄒幸彤形容法庭「創意解讀」控罪
The Hong Kong Alliance, which has been struck off the Companies Register, was convicted of failing to provide information, along with its former vice-chair Chow Hang-tung and two former standing committee members Tang Ngok Kwan and Hon Kwong Tsui. The three were granted leave for a final appeal by the Court of Final Appeal on Wednesday (July 31), with the hearing scheduled for January 8, 2025.
In a judgment handed down by the Court of Final Appeal on Friday (the 2nd), the court not only reaffirmed that leave to appeal had been granted on four issues, but also set out the appellants’ grounds in full. It stated that Chow Hang-tung had said this was the first case under the implementation rules of the National Security Law. She had acted in good faith based on a literal reading of the law and had not expected the court to adopt a “creative interpretation” of the provision, resulting in a sentence close to the maximum penalty. She said this constituted substantive and serious injustice to her.
已被剔除公司註冊的支聯會，前副主席鄒幸彤與兩名前常委鄧岳君、徐漢光，被裁定拒交資料罪成。3 人本周三（ 7 月 31 日）獲得終審法院批出終極上訴許可，定於 2025 年 1 月 8 日進行聆訊。
終院周五（2 日）頒下判詞，除了重申就 4 項議題批出上訴許可，亦完整列出上訴方理據，當中提到鄒幸彤指出，本案是《國安法》實施細則首案，當她按照字面真誠解讀法例行事，沒料到法庭對條例具「創意解讀」（creative interpretation），並判處接近最高判罰的刑期，對她構成實質及嚴重不公。
2 Aug 2024法庭線#3877
新田科技城｜環保署有條件批准環評報告 謝世傑提司法覆核指違《環評條例》
In May 2024, the Director of Environmental Protection conditionally approved the environmental impact assessment report for the San Tin/Lok Ma Chau Development Node. Tse Sai-kit, convener of the Alliance for a Beautiful Environment, filed an application for judicial review at the High Court in a personal capacity on Thursday (1), alleging that the decision breached the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance. Tse Sai-kit also alleged that the Government had expanded the development area without further consultation, making the process procedurally unfair, and sought to overturn the Director of Environmental Protection’s decision.
The Environmental Protection Department said in a statement on Monday evening that it would study the contents of the application in detail and handle the judicial review application in accordance with statutory procedures. It said it was not appropriate to make further comment at this stage.
2024 年 5 月，環保署署長有條件批准新田／落馬洲發展樞紐環評報告，守護大嶼聯盟召集人謝世傑以個人身分，周四（1 日）入稟高等法院提司法覆核，指違反《環評條例》，又指政府擴充發展範圍無再諮詢，涉程序不公，要求推翻環保署長的決定。
環保署周一晚發稿指，將詳細研究申請書內容，並按照法定程序處理相關司法覆核申請，現階段不宜作出進一步評論。
1 Aug 2024法庭線#3869
反恐首案｜控方指「屠龍」被告曾問「使唔使避一避」 必然知計劃用槍和炸彈攻擊警方
In the first case under the Anti-Terrorism Ordinance, seven defendants have pleaded not guilty. The trial at the High Court entered its 63rd day on Thursday (August 1), with the prosecution continuing its closing submissions. The prosecution said the “Dragon Slaying Brigade unit” had agreed that its members would not personally use guns and bombs, but would be responsible for “provoking conflict” in the plan by causing destruction to lure police officers to the scene. Four defendants identified as members of “Dragon Slaying Brigade” had separately taken part in test-firing guns, a meal gathering and meetings to discuss the “12.8 plan”.
Regarding individual defendants, the prosecution said CHEUNG Chun-fu had taken part in discussing where to place the bombs. Cheung Ming-yu had been in contact with co-conspirator Ng Chi-hung and had forwarded a video testing a bomb detonator to the “Dragon Slaying Brigade” group.
Another defendant, Yim Man-Him, had asked beforehand, “After the 8th, do we need to lie low?” The prosecution said this showed he must have known that the plan involved attacking police with guns and bombs, adding, “Viewed in the context of the times, the conspiracy was plainly apparent.” As for defendant Lee Ka Tin, Christian, who said he had merely observed from the sidelines, the prosecution said the team members had shown him close concern: “Is the treatment he received the attitude towards a team member who did nothing?”
《反恐條例》首案，7 人不認罪，周四（8 月 1 日）在高等法院踏入第 63 天審訊。控方繼續結案陳詞，指「屠龍小隊」有共識，不會親自用槍及炸彈，在計劃中負責「引戰」，藉破壞引誘警員到場。而 4 名被指為「屠龍」成員的被告，分別曾參與試槍、飯局和開會，商討「12.8 計劃」。
針對個別被告，控方指張俊富有份商討炸彈擺放位置；張銘裕則與同謀者吳智鴻有聯繫，曾轉發測試炸彈引爆器的影片至「屠龍」群組。
另一被告嚴文謙事前問「8 號之後我哋使唔使避一避？」，控方指反映他必然知悉計劃將用槍和炸彈攻擊警方，「用時代背景去睇，個串謀根本係呼之欲出。」至於被告李家田稱僅在旁觀察，控方指隊員對他關心密切，「得到嘅對待，係咪一個乜都唔做嘅隊員嘅態度？」
1 Aug 2024法庭線#3873
8.31太子站｜5男襲警、阻差等罪成 官明言判監 辯方指案發至今近5年望獲減刑
On August 31, 2019, clashes occurred inside Mong Kok and Prince Edward MTR stations. Riot police entered the stations and subdued and arrested a number of people using batons and other means. Sixteen people were charged with assaulting police and other offences more than three years and eight months later. In one case involving 11 people, five men pleaded not guilty and stood trial. They were convicted at Kowloon City Magistrates’ Courts on Thursday (August 1) and remanded until August 15 for sentencing pending the preparation of background reports.
In mitigation, the defence said that nearly five years had passed since the case began, affecting the defendants’ life planning, and asked the court to exercise discretion in reducing their sentences. The defence also said that one defendant had limited educational qualifications but worked hard and actively participated in bartending competitions, and that he had committed the offence on impulse. Another defendant was the family’s financial pillar and needed to support his elderly parents; the defence said he had lost promotion opportunities because of the case.
After hearing the mitigation submissions, Magistrate Brian Chi Fai Chan said, “The court can say that imprisonment is definitely the sentence; it is purely a matter of length,” and directed the prosecution to submit a timeline of the case.
2019 年 8 月 31 日，旺角及太子港鐵站內發生衝突，防暴警進站以警棍等制服和拘捕多人。16 人事隔逾 3 年 8 個月被起訴襲警等罪，其中一宗涉 11 人案件，5 男不認罪受審，周四（8 月 1 日）在九龍城裁判法院被裁定罪成，還押至 8 月 15 日判刑，以待索取背景報告。
辯方求情時提及，本案至今近 5 年，對被告人生規劃有影響，望酌情減刑。辯方另提及有被告學歷不高但努力工作，積極參加調酒比賽，指他一時衝動犯案；有被告為家中的經濟支柱，且需要供養年邁父母，並指因本案喪失晉升機會。
裁判官陳志輝聽畢求情稱，「法庭可以講，一定係監禁㗎啦，純粹長短」，並著控方呈交本案的時序表。
31 Jul 2024法庭線#3862
被拒收取司徒華回憶錄、六四書籍等4書 鄒幸彤申司法覆核指懲教決定不合憲
Chow Hang-tung, the former vice-chairwoman of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China who is currently remanded in custody over the Alliance case, said her mother tried earlier this year to send her four books published by the Hong Kong Journalists Association, including *People Will Not Forget: A Record of the 1989 Democracy Movement*, the novel *Younger Brother* by Chan Wai, the memoir *The Great River Flows East* by the late Democratic Party veteran Szeto Wah, and the memoir *Words of a Bell Ringer* by Occupy Central initiator Chu Yiu-ming. The Correctional Services Department withheld all four books on grounds including that they contained “biased descriptions of social events” and could cause prisoners to “develop an awareness of opposing governance.”
Chow’s appeal to the Correctional Services Department was also rejected. On Tuesday (the 30th), she filed for judicial review in the High Court, challenging the department’s decision as unconstitutional and unreasonable, and as infringing her freedom of expression protected under the Basic Law. She said the decision placed her at risk of being “completely cut off” from information outside prison, and asked the court to overturn it and allow her to receive the four books at the remand centre.
The application said the books merely described contemporary political events, history and other matters, and were not “banned books” in Hong Kong. Even if some of their content challenged the political order, it said that “in a democratic society, political ideas that challenge the existing political order in a peaceful manner should be given the opportunity to be expressed.”
正就支聯會案還押的前支聯會副主席鄒幸彤，指其母親今年初嘗試送入記協出版的《人民不會忘記：八九民運實錄》、作者陳慧所著小說《弟弟》、已故民主黨元老司徒華回憶錄《大江東去》及佔中發起人朱耀明回憶錄《敲鐘者言》，惟 4 本書遭懲教署以「對社會事件存在偏頗描述」、引起在囚者「萌生對抗管治嘅意識」等理由扣起。
鄒幸彤向懲教署提出上訴亦遭駁回。她周二（30 日）入稟高等法院提出司法覆核，挑戰懲教署的決定不合憲、不合理，侵害她受《基本法》保障的表達自由，令她蒙受與外界資訊「完全隔絕」的風險，要求法庭推翻署方決定，批准她在收押所收取該 4 本書。
入稟狀強調，相關書籍僅描述當代政治事件、歷史等，在香港亦非「禁書」，即使有部分內容挑戰政治秩序，「在一個民主社會，應給予機會表達，以和平方式挑戰現行政治秩序的政治理念」。
31 Jul 2024法庭線#3863
跑馬地警署汽油彈案 4男縱火罪成囚41至63月 母子涉銷毀證據囚半年
Four men allegedly threw three petrol bombs at Happy Valley Police Station in 2020, affecting nearby parked private cars. The younger brother and mother of one of the men were allegedly involved in helping to destroy evidence. One man pleaded guilty to arson, while the other five were convicted of arson or perverting the course of justice. On Wednesday (the 31st), District Court judge Wan Sze-lei sentenced the four arson defendants to between 41 and 63 months in prison. The other two, a mother and son who were involved in conspiring to destroy evidence, were sentenced to six months’ imprisonment.
The judge criticised the four arson defendants for stirring up trouble, seeking chaos, disregarding the law, openly challenging authority and failing to consider whether on-duty police officers might be injured. Had their actions caused a petrol station to catch fire, the blaze could have spread at any time and become uncontrollable. This showed that they had disregarded lives and property and held the law in contempt. Regarding the mother and son who destroyed evidence, the judge said they acted solely to assist and protect family members who had committed offences, and had not planned it in advance. Their actions had no substantial impact on the prosecution or might have affected the weight of the evidence.
4 男於 2020 年涉向跑馬地警署投擲 3 枚汽油彈，波及附近停泊的私家車，其中一人的胞弟及母親涉協助銷毀證據。一男認縱火罪，另 5 人被裁定縱火、妨礙司法公正罪成。法官王詩麗周三（31 日）在區域法院判 4 名縱火被告監禁 41 至 63 個月，另兩人涉串謀銷毀證據，判囚 6 個月。
法官批評 4 名縱火被告行為興風作浪，唯恐天下不亂，目無法紀，公然挑戰權威，亦不顧當值警員會否受傷。若其行為令油站起火，火勢隨時蔓延，一發不可收拾，可見他們漠視生命財產，藐視法律。至於銷毀證據的兩母子，法官指他們一心為協助及保護家人犯案，並非早有預謀，其行為沒有重大影響提控，或影響證據份量。
31 Jul 2024法庭線#3864
反恐首案｜控方結案：「屠龍」成員「行山」試槍後 知悉及加入串謀殺警計劃
In the first case under the Anti-terrorism Ordinance, seven defendants have pleaded not guilty. The trial entered its 62nd day at the High Court on Wednesday (31st), with the prosecution continuing its closing submissions. It said the defendants involved in the “Dragon Slaying Brigade squad” knew of and joined a conspiracy to kill police officers no later than November 2019, after going “hiking” in Sai Kung to test-fire guns.
The prosecution said that after the test-firing, a “Dragon Slaying Brigade” defendant took a handgun, and under the original plan, “Dragon Slaying Brigade” would use firearms. However, after the “Dragon Slaying Brigade” captain Victor Chun Keung Wong met co-conspirator Ng Chi-hung, Victor Chun Keung Wong told members that there was a new plan and that there was “no need to carry out the Glasses plan”. The prosecution said this showed that the “plan to kill police” had already taken shape at that time.
The prosecution also cited “Dragon Slaying Brigade” Telegram messages, saying that the term “20KG” had appeared. Apart from one member who did not attend the meeting, no one else had asked what it meant, indicating that “Dragon Slaying Brigade” had reached an agreement with Ng Chi-hung’s side to use bombs and firearms.
《反恐條例》首案，7 人不認罪，周三（31 日）在高等法院踏入第 62 天審訊。控方續作結案陳詞，指涉及「屠龍小隊」的被告，最遲於 2019 年 11 月到西貢「行山」試槍後，知悉及加入串謀殺警計劃。
控方指，試槍後有「屠龍」被告拿取手槍，而按照原定計劃，「屠龍」會使用槍械；但「屠龍」隊長黃振強與同謀者吳智鴻見面後，黃向成員稱有新計劃，「唔使行眼鏡 plan 」。控方指由此可見，當時「殺警計劃」已成形。
控方另引述「屠龍」TG 通訊，指當中曾出現「20KG」字眼，除沒參與會議的一成員外，其他人未曾問及有何意思，反映「屠龍」已與吳智鴻一方達成協議，將使用炸彈和槍械。
31 Jul 2024法庭線#3865
支聯會拒交資料案｜鄒幸彤3人獲批終極上訴許可、涉4議題 明年1.8聆訊
The Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, which has been struck off the Companies Register, was found guilty of failing to provide information. Its former vice-chairwoman Chow Hang-tung and two former standing committee members Tang Ngok Kwan and Hon Kwong Tsui applied to the Court of Final Appeal for leave to appeal, which was granted. The hearing is scheduled for 8 January 2025.
Acting Chief Justice Li Yee and Permanent Judges Fok Chiu-kong and Lam Man-hon granted leave on three legal issues raised by the applicants. These included whether, under the implementation rules of the National Security Law, the elements of the offence of failing to submit information require proof that the defendants were in fact agents of a foreign country or Taiwan, and whether a police-issued notice to submit information could require defendants to provide information from before the National Security Law came into effect.
The Court of Final Appeal also granted leave on the ground that the redaction of some exhibits under public interest immunity might have caused substantial unfairness at trial. At the hearing, senior counsel representing the applicants Robert Yiu Hung Pang held up copies of the exhibits from the original trial to show the judges that large portions of the contents had been blacked out.
已被剔除公司註冊的支聯會，前副主席鄒幸彤與兩名前常委鄧岳君、徐漢光，被裁定拒交資料罪成。3 人向終審法院申請終極上訴許可，獲得批准，定於 2025 年 1 月 8 日進行聆訊。
署理首席法官李義、常任法官霍兆剛、林文瀚就申請方 3 項法律爭議批出許可，包括《國安法》實施細則下的未提交資料罪，控罪元素是否包括必須證明被告事實上屬外國或台灣代理人，以及警方發出的「遞交資料通知書」，可否要求被告提交《國安法》前的資料等。
另外，終院亦批准申請方以部分證物因「公眾利益豁免權」被遮蓋，有機會造成重大審訊不公為由，批准上訴許可。聆訊時，代表申請方的資深大律師彭耀鴻舉起原審文件證物的副本，向法官展示大量內容遭塗黑遮蓋的情況。
30 Jul 2024法庭線#3860
反恐首案｜控方結案：擲汽油彈屬恐怖主義行為 各被告協議作不法目的 可互不相識
In the first case under the Anti-Terrorism Ordinance, seven defendants pleaded not guilty and the trial entered its 61st day at the High Court on Tuesday (the 30th). The prosecution began its closing submissions, saying that conspiring to place bombs, use firearms, throw petrol bombs and damage public facilities all constituted acts of terrorism. Regarding one defendant charged with assisting in raising funds, the prosecution said the offence did not have to be connected with bombs or firearms, or require proof that the defendant had any role in the 12.8 “plan to kill police officers”.
The prosecution also said the defendants had agreed to pursue an unlawful purpose. They could have joined at different times, might not have known one another and did not need to know each other’s roles, as long as they knew the agreement’s ultimate purpose. Regarding a defendant’s complaint that he had confessed after being assaulted by police, the prosecution said the jury should observe his demeanour during recorded interviews and consider whether he “looked like he had been beaten for 30 to 45 minutes”.
The prosecution also referred to the accomplice witness, Victor Chun Keung Wong, who described himself as the captain of Dragon Slaying Brigade, as “fond of showing off and good food, and a compulsive gambler”. However, large sums of money suddenly flowed to him during the anti-extradition bill protests. The prosecution asked, “How many young people in their early 20s have seen more than a million?” It stressed that the Telegram messages relating to the case were consistent with his testimony, and that the jury should consider his manner and conduct while giving evidence in deciding whether to accept his testimony.
《反恐條例》首案，7 人不認罪，周二（30 日）在高等法院踏入第 61 天審訊。控方開始結案陳詞，指各被告串謀放置炸彈、使用槍械，以至擲汽油彈、破壞公共設施均屬恐怖主義行為。就一被告被控協助籌錢，控方指，此罪毋須與炸彈或槍械有關，或證明被告在 12.8「殺警計劃」中有任何角色。
控方又指，各被告協議作不法目的，各人可在不同時間加入、可互不相識、亦毋須知別人崗位，只須知道協議的最終目的。至於有被告投訴被警施襲而作招認，控方認為應觀察其錄影會面時神態，「似唔似俾人打咗 30 至 45 分鐘」。
控方另提及，從犯證人、自稱「屠龍」隊長的黃振強「貪威識食、爛賭」，但他在反修例時忽然有大額款項湧入，「有幾多個後生仔，廿歲出頭見過百幾萬？」，強調涉案 TG 訊息與其證供脗合，陪審團應留意其作供言行舉止等，去決定是否信納其供詞。
30 Jul 2024法庭線#3861
涉2019年串謀製爆炸品炸「狗屋」 3男判囚8年4月至12年 官：行為有如向警方宣戰
Three men were accused of testing an improvised explosive device on Siu Leng Shui Road in Tuen Mun in December 2019 for use against police, but the test failed. They were charged with one count of conspiracy to cause an explosion of a nature likely to endanger life or cause serious damage to property. Two pleaded guilty, while the other, who was 27 at the time of the offence, was convicted after trial. On Tuesday (30th), Judge Lai Yuen-ki sentenced the two defendants who pleaded guilty to between 8 years 4 months and 8 years 7 months in prison, and sentenced the defendant convicted after trial to 12 years’ imprisonment.
The judge criticised the defendants for intending to endanger police officers and targeting roadblocks and police stations, while disregarding public safety. She said the case occurred during the social unrest in 2019, when violence and attacks on police occurred frequently, and that the conduct was akin to declaring war on law enforcement personnel and the police. The defendants had committed the offences against police who were facing difficulties in enforcing the law at the time, and their conduct was evil. Had police not stopped them in time, the consequences would have been unimaginable.
3 名男子於 2019 年 12 月，在屯門小冷水路，涉試驗土製爆炸裝置後用作對付警方，但試驗失敗。他們被控一項「串謀導致性質相當可能會危害生命或對財產造成嚴重損害的爆炸」罪。當中兩男認罪，另一名案發時 27 歲的男子則經審訊後被裁定罪成。法官黎婉姫周二（30 日）於高等法院判兩認罪被告監禁 8 年 4 個月至 8 年 7 個月，受審後罪成被告則判囚 12 年。
法官批評，被告意圖危害警員，並以路障及警署為目標，罔顧市民安全。法官又指，本案發生於 2019 年社會動盪期間，暴力及襲警事件時有發生，本案行為有如向執法人員及警方宣戰。被告針對當時執法困難的警方犯案，行為邪惡。假若警方沒有及時制止被告，後果不堪設想。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
