2024-06-22 11:00:00
[Independent media report]It has been 5 years because the anti-amendment motion. In keeping with judicial company figures, about 95% of anti-amendment circumstances in courts in any respect rangesClosed. Nevertheless, even when some defendants are acquitted, this doesn’t imply the judicial course of is over. In keeping with statistics from Impartial Media, a minimum of 22 circumstances involving 52 defendants who have been acquitted have been appealed by the Division of Justice within the type of case displays, together with 24 riot defendants concerned within the 8.31 Wan Chai and 11.12 main circumstances. A minimum of 11 of them had their appeals withdrawn as a result of they’d left Hong Kong; a minimum of 10 others have been taken to court docket to impose bail situations and weren’t allowed to go away Hong Kong whereas awaiting attraction.
Of the 9 appeals which were dealt with, 8 have been authorised and a complete of 16 folks needed to be remanded. Amongst them, the 8.31 riot case involving social employee Chen Hongxiu and 4 different folks should be remanded for retrial. Chen Hongxiu maintained his not responsible plea and the case shall be tried on the finish of the yr. The opposite three folks in the identical case deliberate to plead responsible and plead in September this yr, which implies that almost 4 years after the not responsible verdict, they Should serve the sentence once more for the case. One other six circumstances have been despatched again to the primary trial for reconsideration of the decision, together with six defendants charged with rioting, who shall be arraigned one after one other this yr. Some barristers stated that returning the case implies that the prosecution’s authorized viewpoint is accepted by the appeals court docket. Due to this fact, after the case is returned for retrial, the defendant shall be convicted typically.
There are one other 7 circumstances pending for determination or listening to, together with the primary individual in white, Wang Zhirong, who was acquitted, the male scholar who was acquitted of the 11.12 CUHK Bridge riot incident, and the Democratic Celebration Chairman Luo Jianxi, who was acquitted of the 11.18 unlawful meeting in Tsim Sha Tsui. Many of the appeals are being heard. It has been 2 to three, and even 4 years because the authentic not responsible verdict. Enchantment hearings in one other three circumstances are but to be scheduled, and a few circumstances have been acquitted as early as 2021. The barrister stated that it’s not very best for the defendant to attend a number of years after the unique verdict of the case earlier than dealing with the attraction, however the related attraction course of within the system is certainly time-consuming.
Then again, no defendants accused of rioting have been profitable of their appeals thus far. The few circumstances wherein appeals have been profitable contain expenses resembling assaulting a police officer and possession of instruments appropriate for unlawful functions. One of many feminine defendants, who was convicted of arson and sentenced to 34 months in jail, efficiently appealed her conviction and was launched one month earlier than the top of her sentence. “Impartial Media” compiles varied attraction circumstances within the type of case presentation (see the desk inside) to permit readers to understand the progress.
＊＊＊
What’s a case presentation attraction? In keeping with Part 105 of the Magistrates Ordinance and Part 84 of the District Court docket Ordinance, the Secretary for Justice could lodge a grievance with the Court docket of First Occasion and the Court docket of Enchantment respectively in opposition to the acquittal determination of the unique Justice of the Peace or choose within the type of a “case presentation”. Enchantment. Related appeals can solely be made if there are errors in authorized issues or authorized opinions.
Relating to appeals from the District Court docket, the legislation additionally permits the court docket to situation an arrest warrant and impose bail on a defendant who was acquitted on the authentic trial after the attraction is lodged.
The Division of Justice said that from 2019 to 2023, there have been 19 appeals filed within the type of case displays concerning demonstrations and violent crimes triggered by anti-amendment laws. “Impartial Media” inquired what number of circumstances have been closed, what number of appeals have been granted, and the way many individuals have had their appeals withdrawn as a consequence of departure from Hong Kong. The Division of Justice said that it doesn’t preserve related figures.
Eight appeals have been authorised and just one was rejected.
In keeping with statistics from Impartial Media, as of June 18, a minimum of 22 circumstances and 52 defendants who have been acquitted have been appealed by the Division of Justice within the type of case displays, together with 24 defendants charged with rioting, involving 8.31 Wan Chai, 10.6 Wan Chai and 11.12 medium and huge circumstances, and so forth. A minimum of 11 of them left Hong Kong after the unique verdict, and the Division of Justice voluntarily withdrew or was ordered by the Court docket of Enchantment to withdraw the appeals in opposition to them. There’s additionally a feminine defendant accused of rioting who has left Hong Kong. The Division of Justice has withdrawn the appliance for an arrest warrant in opposition to her, however there isn’t any direct reply as as to if to withdraw the attraction in opposition to her. In one other case, the Division of Justice later modified the attraction to solely the authorized prices.
*Commanded to court docket to impose bail situations
3 Riot circumstances should be returned
Among the many 9 circumstances which were dealt with, aside from one involving public nuisance, which was dismissed on the identical day, the Division of Justice within the remaining 8 circumstances all efficiently appealed, and all verdicts have been pronounced 2 to three years after the unique acquittal verdict. Three of the circumstances have been riot circumstances, one needed to be remanded for retrial, and the opposite two have been remanded for reconsideration of the decision.
Amongst them, Decide Shen Xiaomin, who has left Hong Kong and immigrated, dominated in 2020 and 2021 on the 8.31 Wan Chai riot case involving social employee Chen Hongxiu and different 8 folks, and the ten.1 eve short-term rental unit hiding protest gadgets case involving 6 folks. All 14 folks have been charged. invalid.The Division of Justice appealed in opposition to 13 of them, 9 of whom have left Hong Kong, and the remaining 4 have been arrested and delivered to court docketimpose bail situations. In July 2023, the Court docket of Enchantment withdrew the attraction in opposition to the 9 folks primarily based on the truth that the attraction paperwork weren’t correctly served; it additionally criticized the unique choose for making severe errors. The evaluation of the proof was biased and one-sided, out of contact with actuality, and the ruling was opposite to frequent sense.orderChen Hongxiu and three co-defendants who’re nonetheless in Hong Kong shall be despatched again to a different choose within the District Court docket for retrial.Chen HongxiuPending not responsiblethe trial began on December 2 this yr; the opposite three folks deliberate to plead responsible and can plead on September 5, which implies that the three folks should serve their sentences for the case once more almost 4 years after the acquittal.
As for the ten.6 Wan Chai anti-mask legislation case, 5 folks have been discovered not responsible of rioting in December 2021 and have been taken to court docket after serving their sentences.impose bail situations.Court docket of Enchantment Might 2024The Division of Justice’s attraction was dominated to be allowedstated that with out the defendants testifying, the unique trial’s accusation that they entered the riot scene from different roads or didn’t know {that a} riot was happening was “pure hypothesis.” The case shall be heard within the District Court docket on July 4.
As for one more 8.31 riot case, a 20-year-old woman on the time of the incident was discovered not responsible of the crime in August 2021 and was awarded authorized charges. Throughout the attraction listening to in June 2024, the Court docket of Enchantment questioned that the defendant was carrying a helmet, holding a strolling pole, and so forth., and the unique choose didn’t think about the cumulative impact of assorted environmental proof.Order to put aside acquittaland prices order, and remanded the trial choose to rethink the choice. The case shall be heard within the District Court docket on August 1. One other male caregiver in the identical case was additionally appealed by the Division of Justice, however he has left Hong Kong.
Chen Hongxiu
The Magistrates’ Court docket remanded two circumstances in 5 circumstances and the defendants have been absent from the listening to.
The opposite 5 circumstances are all Magistrates’ Court docket circumstances. One of many {couples} was accused of loudly scolding a person who was poured with flammable liquid and set on hearth throughout a dispute with demonstrators in Ma Onshan in November 2019. In August 2020, they have been discovered responsible of disturbing public order. Nevertheless, in Might 2023, the Court docket of First Occasion identified that the authorized viewpoint of the unique trial was misguided and ordered the case to be remanded for reconsideration. In August of the identical yr, three years after their acquittal, the 2 have been re-convicted.5 weeks in jail. The prosecution revealed in court docket that the Division of Justice spent 16 months drafting the primary draft of the case. As a result of there have been numerous anti-amendment circumstances to take care of at the moment, and it was accepted that the case would trigger long-term bother to the 2 folks, the court docket may scale back the sentence.
proceed studying
One other man, who was 22 years previous on the time of the incident, was discovered with Spanana and climbing poles in September 2019. In August 2020, he was discovered responsible of possession of offensive weapons. The unique Justice of the Peace, Lin Ziqin, accepted that the gadgets have been for self-defense. . The Court docket of First Occasion ordered the case to be remanded for reconsideration in July 2023, believing that the unique trial didn’t consider the social setting on the time of the case. Ultimately, the person was convicted in September of the identical yr, greater than three years after his acquittal.3 months in jailthe Justice of the Peace talked about in his ruling that he was topic to the Excessive Court docket’s ruling.
As well as, a 19-year-old man on the time of the incident was concerned in obstructing the police from arresting a lady on July 1, 2020. In July 2021, he was discovered not responsible of obstructing an official from official duties. The Court docket of First Occasion in June 2024The Division of Justice’s attraction was dominated to be allowedstating that the unique trial utilized unsuitable requirements when contemplating whether or not the police carried out their duties correctly, made authorized errors and failed to completely think about the proof, and ordered the case to be remanded to a different Justice of the Peace for a retrial, which has but to be scheduled.
Among the many circumstances the place the appeals have been authorised, in two circumstances, after they have been remanded, the defendants have been absent from the hearings, and the decision and sentencing weren’t processed. A feminine social employee was concerned in a protest in Tsuen Kwai Tsing on August 25 when she refused to indicate her identification card when requested by the police and as a substitute requested the opposite celebration to indicate her authorization card. In September 2020, she was discovered not responsible of obstructing the official’s work. In August 2022, the Court docket of First Occasion identified that the authorized viewpoint within the authentic trial was unsuitable and ordered the primary trial to be remanded for reconsideration. Nevertheless, the defendant subsequently left Hong Kong.Twice absentee case delivered to court docket.
A 20-year-old man on the time of the incident was concerned within the “Store with You” incident at New City Plaza in Sha Tin on Christmas Day 2019, February 2021Cleared of unlawful meeting and granted authorized prices. In April 2024, the Court docket of First Occasion said that the unique verdict was perverse and may have resulted in a verdict of responsible, and ordered the case to be despatched again to the unique trial, the place the defendant was convicted and sentenced as a substitute. Nevertheless, the person was absent from the listening to and his authorized consultant stated he couldn’t be contacted, so the choose issued an arrest warrant.
Just one attraction was refused involving public nuisance
The one attraction that has been dismissed thus far is that two males have been discovered responsible of public nuisance for obstructing the closing of MTR prepare doorways on the primary day of college in 2019. The Excessive Court docket accuser didn’t point out how the 2 males interfered with different obstructions throughout the authentic trial. The folks on the automobile door “acted collectively”. Even when the Justice of the Peace didn’t think about the “precept of joint crime”, it can’t be stated that his acquittal verdict is opposite to frequent sense.The Division of Justice’s attraction was rejected right this moment.
July 1, 2020, Instances Sq..
Common assertion: The additive impact of circumstantial proof may be extra highly effective than direct proof
At current, most circumstances are efficiently appealed. Barrister S (pseudonym) defined that the Court docket of Enchantment will think about whether or not the unique judgment was legally unsuitable or extremely vires. If the unique judgment has reached the appropriate stage after contemplating acceptable components and giving itself acceptable authorized steering, A factual discovering that no cheap choose would attain can also be a legally incorrect discovering and is mostly described as a “perverse” ruling.
Within the riot case, the cumulative impact of circumstantial proof was overwhelming, and the unique verdict was opposite to frequent sense. He quoted a case the place he talked about that circumstantial proof had extraordinary probative energy as a result of there was a considerable amount of proof in a sure path. Linked to one another, corroborating one another, and accumulating in a “geometric development to remove different potentialities,” the cumulative impact of circumstantial proof can typically be extra highly effective than direct proof.
Plaintiff: After the unique trial, the conviction is modified typically
At current, a few of the circumstances have been remanded pending arraignment. If the Court docket of Enchantment remands the case, does it imply that the defendant shall be convicted as a substitute? Barrister S defined that the case offered the doable outcomes of the attraction, together with dismissal of the attraction, overturning the acquittal and remanding the trial for reconsideration, or ordering a retrial. The court docket didn’t have the facility to instantly change the defendant’s responsible verdict, however returning the case meant that the prosecution’s authorized This view was accepted by the Court docket of Enchantment. Due to this fact, after the unique trial was remanded, the defendant can be convicted typically.
As for the 2 circumstances at present being remanded for retrial, he defined that the court docket primarily considers whether or not a retrial is within the pursuits of justice, in addition to the size and complexity of the unique trial, the jail phrases served by the defendant, and so forth. If the authorized points concerned within the attraction relate to the weather of the cost, it is going to have an effect on the prosecution. The better the path of the celebration’s proof, the better the prospect of a retrial. He additionally identified that the court docket acknowledged {that a} retrial order would deliver uneasiness and stress to the defendant, and in addition took under consideration the general public curiosity in bringing the offender to justice. The court docket must strike a steadiness between the 2 primarily based on the circumstances of every case.
7 circumstances pending for determination or listening to
Along with the 9 circumstances which were dealt with, there are one other 10 circumstances which are pending. Amongst them, 7 circumstances are pending for adjudication or attraction listening to, and many of the hearings are 2 to three, and even 4 years after the unique acquittal.
*Taken to court docket to impose bail situations^The Division of Justice’s software for an arrest warrant was rejected
Amongst them, Wang Zhirong, who was discovered not responsible of rioting within the Males in White case, had an attraction listening to in March 2024. The chooseadjourn ruling.
Within the 11.12 CUHK Bridge No. 2 case, a 24-year-old boy on the time of the incident was discovered responsible of rioting in July 2021 and shall be sentenced to demise on July 3 this yr.conduct an attraction listening toone other acquitted defendant in the identical case has left Hong Kong.3 malesConcerned within the 11.12 unlawful meeting in Tsuen Wan, he was discovered not responsible in June 2021 and shall be heard on attraction on August 20.
A 46-year-old man was concerned in an unlawful meeting and masking at “He Ni Store” in Mong Kok on 11.10, July 2021Do away with guiltshall be heard on attraction on September 3; a firefighter in the identical case was additionally discovered responsible. The Division of Justice initially appealed in opposition to his conviction, however later withdrew it and as a substitute appealed in opposition to his prices. In August 2022, he was grantedEnchantment allowed, the firefighter’s authorised prices have been withdrawn.One other restaurant director was concerned within the 11.10 Pageant Stroll “He Ni Store” assaulting law enforcement officials, serving to others escape, and so forth., April 2022Do away with guiltthe attraction shall be heard on September 24.
Democratic Celebration Chairman Luo Kin-hee was concerned within the 11.18 unlawful meeting in Tsim Sha Tsui. He was discovered not responsible in November 2022 and was taken to court docket in December to impose bail situations.attraction listening toIt will likely be held on November twentieth. A 42-year-old girl was concerned in a “personal” feminine nurse clearing a roadblock in Mong Kok in October 2019. In October 2020, she was discovered responsible of inflicting grievous bodily hurt on others. Her attraction listening to shall be held 4 years after the acquittal. It will likely be held on November 26 this yr.
3 circumstances to be scheduled
As well as, there are three attraction circumstances that haven’t but been scheduled, together with the case wherein three folks together with then-Legislative Council member Lam Cheuk-ting have been accused of asking others to delete the mugshots of demonstrators after the “Liberate the Tun Gong” demonstration in July 2019, and have been accused of desiring to impede justice. ; involving8 defendants acquittedThe 11.18 “Rescue PolyU” unlawful meeting case; the 11.13 Sai Wan Ho case involving an 18-year-old manunlawful meeting case. Amongst them, an 18-year-old man was discovered not responsible in 2021, and the attraction listening to has not been processed for almost three years.
*The Court docket of Enchantment withdrew the attraction as a consequence of failure to serve paperwork. There was one other 23-year-old feminine defendant concerned within the 11.18 Yau Ma Tei riot case. The Division of Justice utilized to situation an arrest warrant for her, but it surely was revoked as a result of she had left Hong Kong. The Division of Justice didn’t reply as to if it had been withdrawn. attraction in opposition to it
Plaintiff: The attraction course of took a number of years after the unique trial and was not very best.
The attraction hearings and verdicts of harmless defendants are sometimes separated by greater than 2 to three and even 4 years from the decision of innocence. Is that this unfair to them? Barrister S defined that within the District Court docket, related appeals may be filed inside 7 days after the acquittal verdict, however the court docket has the appropriate to increase the related time restrict; whereas the time restrict for submitting within the Magistrates’ Court docket is inside 14 days after the decision. After the prosecution recordsdata a discover of attraction throughout the statutory time restrict, it must draft a case assertion, together with the important thing factual findings, the authorized factors to be disputed, the unique choose or Justice of the Peace’s assertion on the disputed factors, and the problems invited to be determined by the superior court docket. , after the draft is accomplished, the protection shall be requested to agree on the content material, and the protection will solely submit it to the unique choose or Justice of the Peace for affirmation.
The barrister identified that there isn’t any authorized time restrict for the above course of, and it normally takes a few yr, or much more; till the content material of the submission is confirmed, it nonetheless is dependent upon the schedule of the superior court docket earlier than the listening to may be held. He identified that there are circumstances exhibiting that the general public curiosity requires that prison trials ought to be performed pretty, effectively and rapidly. The identical precept must also apply to prison appeals. It isn’t very best for the defendant to attend a number of years after the unique determination of the case earlier than the attraction is processed, however the institutional strategy of presenting the case for attraction is certainly time-consuming.
On December 7, 2022, Luo Jianxi was arrested and brought to the Excessive Court docket to impose bail situations.
10 folks have been delivered to court docket and bail situations have been imposed after being discovered not responsible.
In keeping with the District Court docket Ordinance, the court docket could situation an arrest warrant and impose bail on an harmless defendant upon attraction by the Division of Justice. In keeping with statistics, there are at present 3 circumstances involving 10 folks, together with the 8.31 Wan Chai riot case, the ten.6 Wan Chai riot case in opposition to the “Masks Ban Legislation” riot case, and the 11.18 Tsim Sha Tsui unlawful meeting case of Luo Jianxi. After the decision of not responsible, he was re-arrested and escorted to court docket. Impose bail situations, together with to not go away Hong Kong. As for the woman who was cleared on attraction within the 8.31 riot case, she was not launched on bail. After being cleared on attraction, she should abide by the bail situations, together with not leaving Hong Kong.
As for the above-mentioned main rescue case wherein eight folks have been acquitted, the Division of Justice utilized to the Court docket of Enchantment for an arrest warrant, requesting that the eight folks be delivered to court docket and impose safety situations whereas ready for the attraction. Nevertheless, Decide Xue Weicheng thought of that the crime was comparatively minor and the bail situations would proceed. Proscribing the liberty of the respondent, and so forth.,Rejection of Division of Justice software. One other Hong Kong College of Know-how analysis assistant who was acquitted of expenses associated to the 11.18 riots was additionally appealed by the Division of Justice. Nevertheless, she left Hong Kong after the ruling, and the Division of Justice withdrew the arrest warrant software in opposition to her. Impartial Media requested the Division of Justice whether or not the related attraction had been withdrawn, and the Division of Justice stated it “doesn’t touch upon particular person circumstances.”
Barrister S quoted the above judgment. Decide Xue Weicheng identified that the court docket’s energy to situation arrest warrants and impose bail is discretionary. Components to contemplate embrace the costs concerned, whether or not the defendant has been granted bail earlier than, the explanations for the acquittal, and the energy of the attraction grounds. and whether or not the imposition of bail on the defendant is important and proportionate. The judgment additionally identified that the aim of this energy is to make sure that the respondent’s “established order” may be maintained within the occasion that the unique trial determination is unsuitable. One of many necessary issues is the chance of him leaving Hong Kong, as a result of if the respondent leaves Hong Kong, even when the prosecution A profitable attraction is worthless. Due to this fact, the bail situations typically imposed by the Court docket of Enchantment will embrace surrendering journey paperwork and requiring the respondent to report back to the police station commonly.
As well as, after checking the data, the Division of Justice said in early January 2021 that it could attraction in opposition to the acquittal verdicts in two circumstances of the 8.31 Causeway Bay riots, together with one20-year-old defendant,and4 different defendants. Nevertheless, reporters have thus far been unable to search out the related attraction case within the litigation register. “Impartial Media” requested the Division of Justice to inquire whether or not the related attraction has been withdrawn. The Division of Justice said that it “doesn’t touch upon particular person circumstances.”
[Five years of opposition to the legislative amendments]A minimum of 52 harmless defendants have been appealed by the Division of Justice and 16 needed to be remanded
Up to now, no defendant convicted of riot has been profitable in attraction.
In keeping with police figures, as of the top of March this yr, a complete of 10,279 folks had been arrested in anti-amendment circumstances, 2,961 folks had accomplished or have been present process judicial proceedings, and a couple of,328 of them needed to bear authorized penalties. Though many defendants discovered not responsible of rioting have been efficiently appealed by the Division of Justice, no defendant convicted of rioting has thus far been profitable in interesting his conviction or sentence.Amongst a minimum of 13 circumstances wherein appeals in opposition to convictions have been authorised, involving crimes resembling assaulting law enforcement officials, possession of offensive weapons, and disorderly conduct in public locations, the primary of those circumstances concerned an actual property agentThe ultimate attraction was profitable, the Court docket of Ultimate Enchantment dominated that the cost of “possession of devices appropriate for illegal functions” didn’t cowl ropes. Three folks have been subsequently charged with the identical crime and efficiently appealed, however the Division of Justice charged different defendants with different expenses. A HKUST scholar was accused of taking part in an assault on a mainland scholar at a discussion board in November 2019. He was convicted of assault inflicting bodily hurt and sentenced to 9 and a half months in jail. The Excessive Court docket said that after reviewing the proof, it was troublesome to soundly settle for that the conviction was secure.put aside his conviction and sentence.
In keeping with experiences, the defendant who had served the longest sentence earlier than being dismissed was a 20-year-old feminine defendant who was concerned in poaching petrol bombs and hiding petrol bombs in a lodge in Yau Ma Tei in February 2020. In March 2016, the attraction was authorised.quashing convictions and sentences, the Court docket of Enchantment criticized the unique choose, Lian Jinhong, for intervening in questioning, which prevented the defendant from receiving a good trial. In Might of the identical yr, the Court docket of Enchantment dominated that the case didn’t should be retried, stating that the sentence for a retrial would typically not exceed the vary of the unique trial, and the defendant can be launched as quickly as 20 days after the decision was issued, so ordering a retrial was not sensible.
1719098861
#years #opposition #legislative #amendmentsAt #harmless #defendants #appealed #Division #Justice #remanded