19 Dec 2025法庭線#7713
黎智英案｜裁決日、判詞報道合集 拆解855頁判詞重點
Media tycoon and Next Digital founder Jimmy Lai, who has been remanded in custody for more than five years, was convicted on Monday (15th) of conspiracy to collude with foreign forces and three counts of sedition. He and the other eight defendants were remanded in custody until mid-January next year for mitigation submissions. The judgment said Lai had harboured resentment towards China for many years, and that his sole intention, both before and after the National Security Law came into force, was to seek the downfall of the Chinese Communist Party. It also said that although Lai became more implicit and obscure in calling for sanctions after the National Security Law took effect, his intention remained unchanged.
What are the key points in the 855-page judgment? What did Apple Daily represent in the judges’ eyes? Why did they find that Lai resented China? And why did the judgment devote extensive coverage to Lai’s words and actions before the National Security Law came into force?
The Witness has brought together all its coverage of the case’s verdict day and the judgment, allowing readers to revisit the proceedings.
還押逾 5 年的壹傳媒創辦人黎智英，周一（15 日）被裁定串謀勾結外力、煽動 3 罪成，與另外 8 被告續還押至明年一月中處理求情。判詞指，黎長年對中國心懷怨恨，指他無論在《國安法》實施前後，唯一意圖是尋求中共倒台，又指在《國安法》後，雖然黎請求制裁時變得含蓄及隱晦，他的意圖依然如故。
究竟 855 頁判詞有何重點？法官眼中的《蘋果》代表甚麼？為何認為黎怨恨中國？判詞又為何要大篇幅提及黎智英在《國安法》生效前的言行？
《法庭線》整合案件裁決日，以及判詞相關的所有報道，方便讀者重溫。
8 Nov 2024獨媒#4219
【西灣河開槍案】胡子鍵搶槍罪成囚6年 上訴遭官駁回：搶奪意圖清晰
On 11 November 2019, the male student “Patrick Chow Pak-kwan” Patrick Chow Pak-kwan, who was shot and wounded by police in Sai Wan Ho, and his secondary-school classmate Wu Tsz-kin were convicted after trial of attempted robbery, obstructing a police officer in the execution of duty, and escaping from lawful custody, and were each sentenced to six years’ imprisonment. The two earlier appealed against their convictions and sentences. Zhou subsequently abandoned his appeal, while Wu’s appeals against his conviction and sentence for attempted robbery were both dismissed. The Court of Appeal handed down its judgment yesterday (the 7th), saying the trial judge’s analysis was logical and reasonable, and that the overall evidence showed that Wu’s intention to seize the gun was very clear. The Court of Appeal said Wu had chosen not to give evidence at trial, so there was no evidence to support whether he had merely intended to “push away” the police gun at the time. The trial judge had also stated that if Wu was afraid the police gun would endanger his safety, he could have chosen to leave.
The case was heard by Court of Appeal judges Patrick Cheung Wai-cheong, Carlye Pang Man-ki and Maggie Poon Po-ying. At trial, Judge Adriana Noelle Tse Ching convicted Wu Tsz-kin of attempted robbery and obstructing a police officer in the execution of duty. Wu appealed against his conviction and sentence for attempted robbery.
2019年11月11日西灣河遭警員開槍射傷的男學生「熊仔餅」周柏均，以及中學同學胡子鍵被指企圖搶警槍，經審訊被裁定企圖搶劫、阻差辦公及在合法羈押下逃脫罪成，各被判囚6年。二人早前不服定罪及刑罰，提出上訴，其後周放棄上訴，至於胡就「企圖搶劫」罪的定罪及刑罰上訴均遭駁回。上訴庭昨（7日）頒下判詞，指原審法官的分析合乎邏輯情理，整體證據所顯示胡的搶奪意圖甚為清晰。上訴庭指，胡在審訊時選擇不作供，故沒有證據支持他當時是否只是想「推開」警槍。而原審法官亦表明，假如胡害怕警槍會危害其安全，可選擇離開。
案件由上訴庭法官彭偉昌、潘敏琦及彭寶琴審理。於原審時，胡子鍵被法官謝沈智慧裁定企圖搶劫及阻差辦公罪成，胡就企圖搶劫罪提出定罪及刑罰上訴。
5 Oct 2024法庭線#4121
上訴庭首宗721白衣人案 指在元朗站「共同意向團伙襲擊」 在英龍圍「放開地打」
The closing submissions have been completed in two cases involving white-clad and non-white-clad defendants over the Yuen Long 7.21 attack, with judgments expected this year. The Court of Appeal has also completed its hearing of the appeal in the first 7.21 case, involving five defendants alleged to be white-clad men. The Court of Law and Human Rights reviewed the judgment and summarised the findings of the three judges on the scenes of the clashes.
In dismissing the appeals of three white-clad men, the judges analysed the situation at Yuen Long Station and said Tang Ying-pan acted together with the white-clad men, “strongly pointing to a group attack with a common intention”. At Ying Lung Wai, the judgment said Ng Wai-nam and other white-clad men shoved with black-clad men. Although the black-clad men retaliated, the white-clad men subsequently “let loose and beat, let loose and assault the black-clad men”, and crossed the road to become the side that provoked the incident.
The Court of Appeal also excerpted the lower court’s judgment, which said several people at the Ying Lung Wai scene had both “the intention and actual acts of jointly disrupting public peace”. In response to the reporter’s enquiry about whether further investigations would be conducted, the police said they were studying the judgment with the Department of Justice and would continue gathering evidence from different angles to conduct a comprehensive and in-depth investigation.
元朗 721 襲擊事件，兩宗白衣人及非白衣人案完成結案陳詞，預定在今年內裁決。上訴庭今年亦完成審理首宗 721 案上訴，涉及 5 名被指為白衣人的被告，《法庭線》翻閱判詞，整理 3 名法官對於衝突現場的裁斷。
在駁回 3 名白衣人的上訴時，法官分析元朗站情況指鄧英斌與白衣人一起行動，「強烈指向一個有共同意向的團伙襲擊事件」；在英龍圍則指吳偉南等白衣人與黑衣人推撞，黑衣人雖有還手，但白衣人之後「放開地打、放開地向黑衣人施襲」，並越過馬路成為挑事的一方。
上訴庭亦節錄原審判詞，指出英龍圍現場有數人亦具「共同破壞社會安寧的意圖和實際行動」。記者向警方查詢會否進一步調查，警回覆指正與律政司研究判詞，並會繼續循不同方面搜證，作出全面及深入的調查。
1 Sept 2024法庭線#3998
《立場》案｜陳文敏：判詞擴大煽動適用範圍、傳媒難拿捏紅線 黃啟暘：由法官裁斷編採決定是否好事？
In the case in which Stand News was charged with conspiracy to publish seditious publications, Judge Kwok Wai-kin found former Stand News editor-in-chief Chung Pui-kuen, acting editor-in-chief Lam Siu-tung and the company to which Stand News belonged guilty. Of the 17 articles involved, 11 were found to have seditious intent.
Johannes Chan, a visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong’s Faculty of Law, told The Witness that the boundary for sedition set by the ruling was unclear, making it difficult for the media to judge the red line in future. He said the judgment had broadened the scope of the sedition offence, including by holding that “disregard for the consequences” was sufficient to prove seditious intent and that it was unnecessary to prove that there was an actual risk to national security. He also said the ruling had not considered all of Stand News’s content, likening the situation to determining that a medical textbook was obscene and indecent based on a single picture in it. He said objective media outlets could publish different viewpoints and content across multiple articles.
《立場新聞》被控「串謀發布煽動刊物」案，法官郭偉健裁定，前《立場》總編輯鍾沛權、署任總編輯林紹桐，以及《立場》所屬公司罪成，涉案 17 篇文章，共 11 篇被裁定具煽動意圖。
港大法律學院客席教授陳文敏接受《法庭線》訪問，形容判決劃定的煽動界線模糊，日後傳媒難拿捏紅線。他又指，判詞擴大了煽動罪適用範圍，包括指「罔顧後果」足證煽動意圖，以及毋須證明對國安構成實質風險等；又認為判詞未有考慮《立場》全部內容，情況如憑醫科書內的一張圖片，判定屬淫褻不雅，指客觀的傳媒，可以是在多篇文章裡刊登不同觀點和內容。
16 Aug 2024法庭線#3911
首宗煽動罪終極上訴 終院拒批違憲議題 判詞：須在建設性批評及煽動間劃界線
Tam Tak-chi, former vice-chairman of People Power, was convicted of 11 offences including uttering seditious words over remarks including “May all black cops’ families die” and “Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times” while operating a street booth in 2020. He was sentenced to 40 months’ imprisonment and has completed his sentence. Dissatisfied with the convictions, Tam was granted leave by the Court of Final Appeal on Wednesday (14th) to apply for a final appeal. The hearing will take place on 10 January next year.
The Court granted leave on two legal points but refused leave on the issue of whether the sedition offence is unconstitutional. In reasons handed down on Thursday (15th), the judges said the sedition provisions set out categories of seditious intention and exempted intention, and that the wording was neither vague nor subjective. The judges reiterated that the law allows members of the public to criticise, “but a line must be drawn between constructive criticism and sedition”.
人民力量前副主席「快必」譚得志，被指 2020 年擺街站時，發表「黑警死全家」、「光時」等言論，被裁定「發表煽動文字」等 11 罪成，判囚 40 個月，已完成服刑。譚不服定罪，周三（14 日）向終審法院申請終極上訴許可獲批，明年 1 月 10 日進行聆訊。
終院就兩個法律觀點批出許可，拒批煽動罪是否違憲此議題。法官周四（15 日）頒判詞指，煽動罪條文列出煽動意圖、免責意圖類別，字眼亦非含糊、主觀。法官重申，法律容許市民批評，「但必須在有建設性的批評及煽動之間劃出界線」。
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。
30 May 2024法庭線#3596
47人案裁決判詞速讀｜2人無罪 14人罪成 16名被告裁決理據一覽
The 47-person case was adjudicated at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Thursday morning (the 30th). Of the 16 defendants who had pleaded not guilty, only Lawrence Wai Chung Lau and Yue Shun Lee were acquitted, becoming the first two defendants acquitted since the enactment of the National Security Law; the remaining 14 were all convicted. Based on the judgment, The Witness compiled the judges’ grounds for the verdicts concerning each of the 16 defendants.
All defendants: Lawrence Wai Chung Lau, Yue Shun Lee, Ng Jing-hang, Cheng Tat-hung, Yeung Suet-ying, Michael Cheuk Kei Pang, Ho Kai-ming, Wong Pik-wan, Sze Tak-lai, Ho Kwai-lam, Chan Chi-chuen, Chow Ka-shing, Lam Cheuk-ting, Leung Kwok-hung, Ricky Yiu Lam Or, Yu Wai-ming
47 人案周四（30 日）早上在西九龍裁判法院裁決，16 名不認罪被告之中，僅劉偉聰、李予信獲定無罪，成為《國安法》後首兩名無罪被告；其餘 14 人則全部被裁定罪成。《法庭線》根據判詞內容，逐一整理法官就 16 名被告的裁決理據。
全部被告已上載：劉偉聰、李予信、吳政亨、鄭達鴻、楊雪盈、彭卓棋、何啟明、黃碧雲、施德來、何桂藍、陳志全、鄒家成、林卓廷、梁國雄、柯耀林、余慧明
30 May 2024集誌社#3598
47人案裁決｜首度有國安案被告脫罪 總警司李桂華：45 人罪成，調查質素相當高
The 47-person case was handed down its verdict today (30th). Of the 16 defendants who pleaded not guilty, 14 were convicted, while Yue Shun Lee and Lawrence Wai Chung Lau were found not guilty. This is the first time defendants in a national security case have been acquitted. After their acquittal, Lawrence Wai Chung Lau and Yue Shun Lee remain subject to bail conditions. Li Kwai-wah, chief superintendent of the National Security Department, said that 45 people had been convicted: “I think the quality of our investigation was quite high.” Regarding the requirement for those acquitted to remain on bail, Li said the Criminal Procedure Ordinance allows this.
47人案今日（30日）裁決，16名不認罪被告中，有14人被裁定罪成，李予信、劉偉聰二人罪名不成立。今次是首度有國安案被告脫罪，而兩名被告劉偉聰和李予信脫罪後，仍受保釋條件限制。國安處總警司李桂華回應指，案件有 45 人罪成，「我覺得，我哋調查質素相當之高。」至於無罪仍需保釋，李桂華指，《刑事控訴程序條例》容許這樣做。
30 May 2024法庭線#3605
47人案裁決理據｜戴耀廷為主推手、3政黨立場變 無差別否決逼回應無疑違基本法
The 47-case verdict was delivered at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Thursday (30th). Of the 16 defendants who pleaded not guilty, only Lawrence Wai Chung Lau and Yue Shun Lee were acquitted, becoming the first two defendants acquitted since the National Security Law came into force; the remaining 14, including Ho Kwai-lam and Leung Kwok-hung, were all convicted.
The judge ruled that Dai Yaoting “was indeed the brains and main driving force behind the 35+ plan”. The judge also said that the Civic Party was initially hesitant but later changed its stance and stated at a press conference in March that it would veto every bill if the government did not respond to the “five demands”. The judge therefore ruled that the conspiracy agreement was formed as early as March 2020. The Democratic Party and League of Social Democrats also changed their stances subsequently.
In the 337-page judgment, more than 40 pages addressed legal disputes. On the “illegal means” element of the offence of subversion, the judge referred to the National People’s Congress’s “explanation” and “decision”, and said that it was not limited to acts involving force or to criminal offences. The judgment also said that indiscriminately vetoing the budget in order to force the government to respond to the “five demands” unquestionably violated the provisions of the Basic Law.
47 人案周四（30 日）在西九龍裁判法院裁決，16 名不認罪被告之中，僅劉偉聰、李予信無罪，成為《國安法》後首兩名無罪被告；何桂藍、梁國雄等其餘 14 人全部罪成。
法官裁定，戴耀廷「的確是 35+ 計劃的大腦及主要推手」，又指公民黨最初猶豫，後來立場轉變並於 3 月的記招提出如政府不回應「五大訴求」，將否決每個法案，故裁定串謀協議最早於 2020 年 3 月形成；而民主黨、社民連，亦於其後改變立場。
在長達 337 頁的判詞中，有逾 40 頁處理法律爭議，就顛覆罪中的「非法手段」，官詮釋時引人大「說明」及「決定」，指不限於涉武力，亦不限於刑事罪行。判詞又指，無差別否決預算案，以迫使政府回應「五大訴求」，無疑違反《基本法》規定。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
