判決理由書／裁決書撮要(由AI生成)
以下撮要以AI生成及／或翻譯，內容以原來的判決理由書／裁決書為準。
The judgment stated that, in response to changes in the pandemic situation and venue resources, the prosecution applied to the court for two consolidated trials: the first to merge DCCC115/2021, DCCC112/2021 and DCCC114/2021, involving a total of 26 defendants; the second to merge DCCC113/2021 and DCCC116/2021, involving 23 defendants. The prosecution argued that this would make better use of courtroom facilities and judicial resources and could be handled by written procedure. The defence, citing rights to a public hearing, difficulties in rescheduling, additional costs, health risks and procedural instability, saw several defendants object or remain neutral.
According to the practice directions and section 10 of the Human Rights Act, any change to the trial date must be supported by sufficient reasons and approved by the court.
In view of limited court resources and the fact that the original trial timetable was pragmatically set with no material changes; and that the second consolidation, given the similar issues in dispute and evidence and the ample time available for rescheduling, would facilitate a unified hearing and conserve resources.
The judge held that the first consolidation lacked sufficient justification and dismissed it; the second consolidation met the requirements of procedural fairness and resource efficiency and was approved.
It was ultimately ordered that the application to consolidate cases DCCC115/2021, 112/2021 and 114/2021 be dismissed, while the consolidation of cases DCCC113/2021 and 116/2021 was approved, and a joint trial of approximately 40 days was scheduled from 14 August to 9 October 2023. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判決理由書／裁決書
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 the 23 defendants participated in the unapproved ‘Global Anti-Totalitarianism March’ on 29 September 2019. More than a thousand protesters blocked roads, erected barricades, burned miscellaneous items, and threw petrol bombs and bricks as they confronted the police in the Admiralty area, causing a paralysis of public transport and serious social disorder. One defendant was found in possession of two laser pens at the time of arrest and was additionally charged with possession of an offensive weapon.
The offence of rioting carries a maximum sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment and generally requires immediate custody; the court set a starting point of 51 months’ imprisonment and will adjust the sentence according to the degree of participation and the individual’s background.
In sentencing, primary consideration was given to the large scale of the riot, which lasted more than two hours, involved over a thousand participants, and used violent and destructive means to severely disrupt public order and social tranquillity; the motive or ideology of the participants does not constitute a mitigating factor; the sentence must demonstrate a firm condemnation of violent and destructive conduct and have a deterrent effect.
The judge expressed deep regret for the majority of young first-time offenders, emphasising that violence is not a solution, and urged the defendants to engage in profound reflection and genuine repentance, to observe the law voluntarily in the future, and to make amends to their families and society.
Except for two defendants who pleaded not guilty and were sentenced to 46 months and 50 months’ imprisonment respectively, the remaining 21 defendants who pleaded guilty received a one-third or 20% reduction in their sentences in light of their guilty pleas and personal circumstances, resulting in final terms ranging from 28 to 46 months; the defendant charged with possession of an offensive weapon was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment for that offence, to be served in instalments. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書