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 states that Defendant and three others held a press conference on 30 September 2019 to incite the public to join an unauthorised procession on National Day despite a police prohibition upheld on appeal. On 1 October 2019, ten defendants organised and led a march from Causeway Bay to Central, carrying banners, leading chants and urging participation. The unauthorised assembly caused serious disruption to roads and public transport, and was accompanied by acts of vandalism, obstruction and violence by participants, including throwing petrol bombs and projectiles. All defendants pleaded guilty to organising the unauthorised assembly; the first four also pleaded guilty to incitement, and two pleaded guilty to knowingly taking part.
The judge applied a deterrent and punitive sentencing approach, adopting principles from Secretary for Justice v Wong Chi Fung and related authorities. Immediate terms of imprisonment were deemed the only appropriate option to maintain public order, taking into account the inherent risk of violence at large gatherings and the need for both punishment and general deterrence. A discount of 25% was allowed for early guilty pleas.
The sentence reflected the seriousness of defying a lawful prohibition, the scale of public disruption, the participants’ violent conduct, the defendants’ roles and premeditation, the prevailing social unrest, prior convictions by some, and mitigation from personal letters and public service. The judge considered the need to uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of others.
The judge held that the offences were not peaceful despite protestations, that reliance on civil disobedience carried little weight given the context of escalating violence, and that the defendants knowingly challenged public order. She emphasised that freedom of assembly is not absolute and that defiance of lawful restrictions must attract immediate custodial sentences to deter similar conduct.
The first to fourth defendants were each sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment, to run concurrently on incitement and organisation charges. Defendants five to eight each received 14 months’ imprisonment for organising the assembly. The seventh and tenth defendants also received nine months’ imprisonment for knowingly taking part, concurrent with their organisation sentences. Defendants nine and ten received 14-month terms suspended for 24 months. Repeat offenders had portions of these terms ordered to run consecutively to existing sentences, producing effective totals of up to 22 months’ custody.
查看完整判刑理由書