5 Nov 2025法庭線#7490
理大突圍｜10人暴動判囚上訴得直 獲減刑2至6月 料大部分2026年獲釋
On 18 November 2019, police surrounded Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Eleven people accused of “breaking out” in the area of Cheong Wan Road were charged with rioting and sentenced to between 3 years 10 months and 6 years in prison. All 11 appealed against their sentences. Ten succeeded and had their terms reduced by 2 to 6 months; two of them failed in separate appeals against their convictions.
The appellants argued that the trial judge, Adriana Noelle Tse Ching, had set a starting point of 6 years for sentencing, which was too high. Citing the “Leung Tsz-yeung case”, in which the circumstances were similar, they argued that the starting point should have been 3 years. The judgment rejected this, saying that the protesters in this case confronted police for longer and attacked more aggressively, making the circumstances more serious than in that case. However, it agreed that one of the riot offences concerned only one day of the PolyU incident, and that the starting point should therefore be reduced slightly to 5 and a half years. It also took into account that one of the appellants, who worked as a nurse, took the risk of participating in anti-epidemic efforts in 2020, and exercised discretion to reduce the sentence by 2 months.
According to statistics compiled by The Witness, assuming that all 11 behave well in prison and receive the full one-third remission, two are expected to be released this year, seven next year, and the remaining two in 2028.
2019 年 11 月 18 日，警方圍堵理工大學，11 人被指在暢運道一帶「突圍而出」、被控暴動，判囚 3 年 10 月至 6 年。11 人就刑期提上訴，當中 10 人上訴得直，獲減刑 2 至 6 個月；其中兩人就定罪提上訴則失敗。
上訴方爭議，原審法官謝沈智慧以 6 年為量刑起點屬過高，參考背景相同的「梁子揚案」，應以 3 年為起點。判詞反駁，本案示威者與警方對峙時間更長、攻擊更激進，情節較該案嚴重。惟同意其中一項暴動罪，只針對理大事件其中一日，量刑起點應略為下調至 5 年半，另考慮其中一名任職護士的上訴人，於 2020 年冒險參與抗疫，酌情減刑 2 個月。
據《法庭線》統計，假設案中 11 人在獄中行為良好，獲全數三分一減刑，預料兩人於今年內獲釋，7 人明年獲釋，其餘兩人則於 2028 年獲釋。
5 Sept 2025法庭線#7263
理大衝突｜服刑完畢鄭錦滿暴動上訴得直 上訴庭指原審准控方加控暴動屬犯錯
During the PolyU clashes in November 2019, eight people were accused of assisting protesters in escaping PolyU through drainage channels and leaving in “parent cars” sent to pick them up. Five of them pleaded not guilty and stood trial. Former Civic Passion member Cheng Kam-mun was convicted of rioting and sentenced to three years and eight months in prison, while the other four were convicted of intending to obstruct the course of justice and sentenced to between 12 and 13 months’ imprisonment. The five convicted defendants appealed against their convictions. The Court of Appeal of the High Court handed down its judgment on Friday (the 5th), allowing Cheng Kam-mun’s riot appeal and quashing his conviction and sentence.
2019 年 11 月理大衝突，8 人被指協助爬渠逃出理大的示威者離開，並駕「家長車」接應，當中 5 人不認罪受審；前熱血公民成員鄭錦滿被裁定暴動罪成，判囚 3 年 8 個月；另外 4 人則被裁定意圖妨礙司法公正罪成，判監 12 至 13 個月。5 名罪成被告不服定罪提上訴，高等法院上訴庭周五（5 日）頒判詞，當中裁定鄭錦滿暴動上訴得直，撤銷定罪及判刑。
判詞提到，原審區院暫委法官鄭念慈容許控方對鄭在意圖妨礙司法公正之外再加控暴動屬犯錯，形容是一個「遲來得可以的舉動」，使鄭被「兩面包抄」，又指控方修訂後的，是「全方位無死角」的控罪書。
鄭錦滿已刑滿出獄。據《法庭線》統計，鄭為反修例相關案件中，第二名被指為示威者，而就暴動罪上訴得直的被告。至於其餘 4 人意圖妨礙司法公正罪的上訴則被駁回，維持原判。
15 May 2025法庭線#6790
理大衝突｜5男事隔逾4年半被控暴動 2人擬認罪、2人擬不認罪 明年5.4開審
In November 2019, police cordoned off protesters inside The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, and clashes broke out between the two sides. More than four and a half years later, at the end of June 2024, police re-arrested five men and charged them with rioting and other offences. Four of them appeared again in the District Court on Thursday (15th).
2019 年 11 月，警方圍堵理工大學內的示威者，雙方爆發衝突。警方事隔 4 年半、於 2024 年 6 月底重新拘捕 5 名男子，控以暴動等罪，其中 4 人周四（15 日）在區域法院再訊。
辯方透露，首被告及第三被告擬認暴動罪，第二及第四被告擬不認罪，案件將於 2026 年 5 月 4 日開審，為期 20 天，屆時將一併處理認罪被告的答辯及求情。案發時未成年的第三被告申請放棄保釋，即時還押，其餘被告則繼續擔保。另外，第五被告去年 10 月提訊時沒有到庭，當時法官已發出拘捕令。
控方於庭上透露，案件有 240 位事實證人，亦會傳召政府化驗師作專家證人；庭上將播放長達 182 分鐘的錄影片段。第二及第四被告並無招認證供。
16 Nov 2024法庭線#4241
理大衝突5年｜338人被控暴動 量刑起點最高7年 法官有何判刑考慮？
In November 2019, protesters occupied the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, triggering a series of clashes. Some attempted to leave the campus by breaking through police lines, abseiling and climbing through drainage channels, while others responded to online calls to “besiege Wei to rescue Zhao” by launching actions in Yau Tsim Mong. More than 1,000 people were arrested. According to statistics compiled by The Witness, 338 people have been charged with rioting since police sealed off PolyU. Five years on, most of the cases have been concluded, with two cases involving a total of eight people remaining—some awaiting sentence and others awaiting trial.
The PolyU riot involved multiple stages. Judges set different sentencing starting points based on the circumstances of each case and the level of violence involved. In one case concerning an attempt to break out along Cheong Wan Road, Judge Adriana Noelle Tse Ching said that “breaking out and fleeing” was an inseparable part of the PolyU riot. Protesters attacked police with bows and arrows and a large number of petrol bombs, while one defendant was carrying petrol bombs. The judge set that defendant’s sentencing starting point at seven years, the maximum sentence available in the District Court.
The next-highest starting point was six years in a case involving protesters descending by rope. Judge Esther T. L. Wong said that “rioters extensively set fire to the toll booths at the Cross-Harbour Tunnel” and that “the area around PolyU was ablaze, filled with smoke and flames, resembling a battlefield”. She considered that the defendants who left the campus had participated in a riot that was extremely large in scale, highly destructive and involved a large number of people.
2019 年 11 月，示威者佔據理工大學，爆發連串衝突。有人透過突圍、游繩及爬渠等方法嘗試離開校園；另有人響應網上號召，在油尖旺發起「圍魏救趙」，逾千人被捕。根據《法庭線》統計，自警方封鎖理大後，有 338 人被控暴動。事件至今 5 年，大部分案件已審結，剩兩案共 8 人分別候判及候審。
理大暴動涉及多個階段，法官因應案情、暴力程度等，定下不同量刑起點。其中在一宗暢運道突圍案，法官謝沈智慧指，「突圍逃走」是理大暴動不可分割的一部分，示威者以弓箭及大量汽油彈攻擊警方，加上該被告攜有汽油彈，將其中一名被告的量刑起點定在 7 年、達區域法院判刑上限。
其次為示威暫者游繩案，被告量刑起點為 6 年。法官王詩麗指，「暴徒大肆焚燒紅隧的收費亭」、「理大外圍一帶火光熊熊、烽煙四起、儼如戰場」，認為從校園離開的被告，參與這場規模十分龐大、具殺傷力及人數眾多的暴動。
5 Jul 2024法庭線#3783
逃出理大案｜19人妨礙公正、暴動等罪成判囚 刑期最重8人提上訴
In November 2019, large numbers of protesters inside the Hong Kong Polytechnic University were surrounded by police. Nineteen people were accused of helping others escape, including by driving protesters away, and were charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice, riot and other offences. Five pleaded guilty to riot, while the remaining 14 were convicted after trial. They were sentenced to between 20 and 70 months’ imprisonment, as well as training centre orders.
Judiciary records show that the eight defendants who received the longest sentences—between 60 and 70 months’ imprisonment—appealed against their convictions and sentences last Friday (the 28th). The cases are awaiting listing.
2019 年 11 月，理工大學內大批示威者被警方包圍，19 人被指協助他人逃出，包括駕車接載示威者離開等，被控意圖妨礙司法公正、暴動等罪。當中 5 人承認暴動罪，餘下 14 人經審訊後被裁定罪成；他們被判囚 20 至 70 個月，以及教導所。
司法機構資料顯示，刑期最重即判囚 60 至 70 個月的 8 名被告，上周五（28 日）不服定罪及判刑提出上訴。案件暫待排期處理。
4 Jul 2024法庭線#3777
理大衝突｜醫生指警誤射催淚彈索償案 原告申蕭澤頤等3警作供被拒、不服提上訴
In November 2019, during the clashes at the Polytechnic University, an ear, nose and throat doctor who operated a clinic near the university said police mistakenly fired a tear-gas round into the clinic, causing a fire and damage. The doctor filed a claim against the police in 2021 seeking more than HK$6.72 million in compensation. The plaintiff had earlier sought to call Commissioner of Police Chris Tang and two other police officers to testify, but the application was rejected by a High Court master. He has appealed the decision.
The case was heard in the High Court on Thursday (4th). After hearing submissions from both sides, Judge Ouyang Kwei-yu adjourned the decision until before the end of July. The plaintiff questioned how the police, whom he said were the party that fired the tear-gas round, could conclude after three years of investigation that they did not know which officer had fired it. He asked Tang, as head of the police force, to personally explain the investigation’s findings. The Police Commissioner’s side reiterated that it was “simply impossible to find out” who had fired the tear-gas round in question, and that someone else might have picked it up and thrown it amid the disorder. It argued that Tang’s evidence was irrelevant to the case.
2019 年 11 月，理大衝突期間，在理大附近開設診所的耳鼻喉科醫生，稱遭警方誤射催淚彈入診所，致起火受損，於 2021 年入稟向警方索償逾 672 萬港元。原告醫生早前要求傳召警務處長蕭澤頤及另兩名警員作供，遭高院聆案官拒絕，他不服決定提出上訴。
案件周四（4 日）在高院處理，法官歐陽桂如聽罷雙方陳詞，押後 7 月底前頒下裁決。原告質疑警方是發射催淚彈的一方，不可能經過 3 年調查，總結不知道是那名警員發射催淚彈，要求蕭澤頤身為警隊之首，親自解釋調查結果；警務處一方則重申警方「根本不可能找出」發射涉案催淚彈的人，亦可能是其他人趁亂撿起催淚彈投擲，認為蕭的證供與案無關。
18 Jun 2024法庭線#3703
逃出理大案｜17人妨礙司法公正、暴動等罪成 囚20至70月 官斥理大生被告毀校園
In November 2019, a large number of protesters inside Hong Kong Polytechnic University were surrounded by police. Nineteen people were accused of helping others escape from PolyU and charged with offences including intending to pervert the course of justice and rioting. Five pleaded guilty to rioting, while the remaining 14 denied the charges and stood trial. They were previously found guilty of all charges, and two of them had already been sentenced.
Judge Wong Sze-lai dealt with the sentencing of the other 17 defendants at the District Court on Tuesday (18th). Five defendants identified as drivers were sentenced to between 20 and 24 months in prison. The other 12 defendants involved in the riot were sentenced to between 60 and 70 months in prison.
The judge criticised the PolyU protesters for acting recklessly and showing disregard for the law, saying they must bear criminal responsibility for their wrongdoing. She also said that some defendants were PolyU students or had previously studied there when the offences occurred, and that they had taken part in destroying their own campus. Regarding the defendants identified as drivers, the judge said that without the police operation, the defendants charged with rioting might have successfully left, describing their conduct as undermining the administration of justice.
2019 年 11 月，理工大學內大批示威者被警方包圍，19 人被指協助他人逃出理大，被控「意圖妨礙司法公正」、「暴動」等罪。當中 5 人承認暴動罪，餘下 14 人不認罪受審，早前被裁定所有罪名成立，其中兩人早前已處理判刑。
法官王詩麗周二（18 日）在區域法院處理其他 17 名被告的判刑，當中被指為駕駛者的 5 名被告，被判監 20 個月至 24 個月。至於另外 12 名涉及暴動的被告，則被判監 60 個月至 70 個月不等。
法官批評，理大示威者胡作非為、目無法紀，要為惡行負上刑責，又指有部分被告案發時是理大生，或曾就讀理大，他們有份摧毀自己的校園。至於被指為司機的被告，法官指若非警方行動，涉及暴動罪的被告可能已成功離開，形容被告行為打擊司法公義的執行。
29 Feb 2024法庭線#3067
逃出理大案｜14人妨礙司法公正、暴動等罪成 官指接載司機、乘客共同行動
In November 2019, large numbers of protesters inside the Polytechnic University were surrounded by police. Nineteen people accused of helping others escape the university were charged with offences including intent to pervert the course of justice. Five pleaded guilty to rioting, while the remaining 14 pleaded not guilty and stood trial. On Thursday (29th), the District Court found all 14 guilty on all charges. They were remanded until 27 April for mitigation together with the other defendants who had pleaded guilty.
Judge Wong Sze-lai ruled that nine of them had escaped from the university and were guilty of rioting. She said they had not left in a “peaceful and orderly” manner, but had instead abseiled or fled and sought vehicles to pick them up, adding that “the purpose was crystal clear: it was to evade arrest by the police”.
As for the five people who provided transport or drove the vehicles, the judge said they knew the passengers had left the university, stating that “they were carrying rioters to evade arrest by the police”. The judge also said the drivers and passengers involved shared a common purpose, namely that “both sides acted together to achieve freedom from arrest”, and found all 14 guilty of intending to pervert the course of justice.
2019 年 11 月，理大內大批示威者被警方包圍，19 人被指協助他人逃出理大，被控「意圖妨礙司法公正」等罪，5 人承認暴動罪，餘下 14 人不認罪受審，周四（29 日）在區院被裁定所有罪名成立，還押至 4 月 27 日與其他認罪被告求情。
法官王詩麗裁定，其中 9 人從理大逃出，暴動罪成，指他們沒依照「和平有序」的方法離開，反而游繩或逃離，尋求車輛接載，「目的昭然若揭，就是要逃避警方的逮捕」。
至於接載或駕車的 5 人，官指他們知悉上車人士是從理大離開，指「他們是接載暴徒逃避警方的逮捕」。官並指，涉案司機及乘客懷共同目的，就是「雙方共同行動達致免於被捕」，裁定全部 14 人意圖妨礙司法公正罪成。
27 Feb 2024法庭線#3054
理大「突圍」｜護理學生暴動罪成 提上訴被駁回 官：要急救經驗去單車徑
In November 2019, police surrounded protesters inside the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Seventeen people were suspected of breaking out and were subsequently arrested inside the Science Museum. One of them, a nursing student, denied two counts of riot and was convicted after trial and sentenced to three and a half years in prison. He appealed against his conviction, and the case was heard by the High Court’s Court of Appeal on Tuesday (27th).
2019 年 11 月，警方圍堵理工大學內的示威者，其中 17 人疑「突圍而出」，及後在科學館內被捕，其中一名護理學生否認兩項暴動罪，受審後被裁定罪成，判囚 3 年半。他不服定罪提出上訴，周二（27 日）在高院上訴庭審理。
上訴方認為，原審法官裁決時未有充分考慮，上訴人入理大的意圖是想急救，幫助可能受傷的人。法官彭偉昌質疑，上訴人必然會知道，理大內的人必然是佔據的人士。法官潘敏琦亦稱，「佢不請自來，你明知嗰度生事，無論你為個人原則咩都好……你都係深入虎穴。」彭偉昌又指，「你話想拎急救經驗，要急救經驗你去單車徑啦，俾催淚彈醃眼、俾子彈打……呢啲經驗攞嚟做咩嘢？」
3 名法官聽取雙方陳詞後，即日駁回上訴人的上訴申請。
5 Dec 2023Channel C#8766
理大向全體師生發電郵谷票 稱選舉具重大歷史意義：選最適合、愛國愛港的區議員
Hong Kong Polytechnic University Council Chairman Lam Tai-fai and President Teng Jin-Guang emailed all staff, students and graduates today (the 5th), saying the District Council election would be Hong Kong’s first territory-wide district election since the District Councils were reshaped. They said it was an important milestone in improving district governance and had major historical significance, and urged voters to vote with their relatives and friends on December 10 to elect the district councillors they considered most suitable, patriotic, Hong Kong-loving and capable to serve their communities, help Hong Kong improve the effectiveness of district governance, implement good governance, and build better communities.
香港理工大學校董會主席林大輝及校長滕錦光，今日（5日）向全體師生及畢業生發電郵指，區議會選舉將舉行，為香港重塑區議會後首場全港性地區選舉，是完善地區治理的重要里程碑，具有重大歷史意義，呼籲選民在12月10日與親友一同投票，選出自己認為最適合、愛國愛港、有能力的區議員服務社區，協助香港提升地區治理效能、貫徹良政善治和建設更美好的社區。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
