判刑理由書撮要(由AI生成)
以下撮要以AI生成及／或翻譯，內容以原來的判刑理由書為準。
The judgment notes that on 18 November 2019, over a hundred demonstrators gathered at the East Tsim Sha Tsui Science Museum Plaza and the adjacent Science Museum Road, opened umbrellas to form an “umbrella formation”, chanted slogans and advanced towards the police lines. After multiple warnings went unheeded, the police fired tear gas and pepper balls to disperse the crowd, and at 08:18 arrested a total of 135 people. The five defendants admitted participating in an unlawful assembly, occupying the plaza, ignoring police warnings, confronting the police lines, and carrying various protest equipment and tools with the intention of disrupting order and intimidating others.
There is no specific sentencing guideline for the offence in this case. With reference to the principle in the Court of Appeal’s Joshua Wong case, the focus is on retribution and deterrence, taking into account factors such as the organisation and planning of the gathering, its duration, the police’s repeated warnings and dispersal actions, whether the defendants committed any violence, and the impact on social and international image.
The defendants all came prepared, volunteered to participate, and disregarded warnings, in an organised unlawful assembly. Although they did not use overt violence, they used umbrellas to resist and insulted police officers, affecting the work of citizens and the movement of travellers, and challenged the enforcement and authority of the police. The sentencing benchmark starts at 24 months’ imprisonment, with consideration given to the defendants’ guilty pleas, status as first-time offenders, age, health and background reports, allowing for appropriate sentence reductions or alternative rehabilitative dispositions.
The court believes that violence and destruction do not contribute to social progress, and any dissatisfaction should be expressed by lawful means. Unlawful assemblies directly undermine social order and weaken the ability of the law, the police and the government to maintain peace, and must be responded to firmly to prevent escalation; youth is not a defence, but considerations of punishment and rehabilitation should be balanced.
The third and fourth defendants were each sentenced to immediate custody for 16 months; the seventh defendant, having regard to his family and rehabilitative needs, was instead ordered to undergo an educational order at a rehabilitation centre for not less than six months and not more than three years; the eighth defendant was sentenced to immediate custody for 18 months; the ninth defendant to immediate custody for 14 months. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書