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 states that the defendant, together with around 20,000 protesters, participated in the “Global Anti-Totalitarian March” in the Admiralty area of Hong Kong on 29 September 2019. The march, which had not been approved by the police, soon developed into a three-stage riot lasting about two hours. In the first stage, protesters near Queensway and Legislative Council Road damaged National Day exhibition panels, burned flags and set up roadblocks; in the second stage, about 500 people occupied the carriageway and flyover on Harcourt Road, formed an umbrella barricade to confront the police, and threw bricks and petrol bombs at the Government Headquarters; in the third stage, protesters continued to blockade roads and start fires around Cotton Tree Drive and Queensway. The police issued multiple warnings and deployed tear gas and water cannon to disperse them, and ultimately made large-scale arrests to restore order.
Under the offence of rioting, the maximum penalty is ten years’ imprisonment, with no fixed guideline. Sentencing takes reference from the 12 factors considered in the cases of Tang Ho-hin and Leung Tin-kei, including the scale of the riot (about 500 people), the degree of violence (use of bricks, petrol bombs, etc.), the duration (about two hours), the location (around the Government Headquarters), and the impact on public order and traffic; the starting point for adult offenders is recommended at four years.
The defendant was only 16 at the time of the offence, a first-time offender who pleaded guilty and showed remorse, but nonetheless took part at the frontline in forming an umbrella barricade and held a brick to confront the police, thereby assisting and encouraging participation. The level of violence and organisation could not be ignored. Considering the defendant’s youth, academic and family background, lack of criminal record, and good attitude in pleading guilty, and having regard to the Juvenile Offenders Ordinance and relevant case law cited in mitigation, the court ordered detention in a training centre to balance punishment with rehabilitation.
The judge considered the case to be a serious crime of large-scale, high-level violence requiring real deterrent effect; however, balancing the defendant’s youth and potential for reform, detention in a training centre was seen as a means to strike a balance between societal interests and the defendant’s rehabilitative needs.
The defendant was sentenced to detention in a training centre. (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 pointed out that on 29 September 2019, the eight defendants participated in an unauthorised assembly on Queensway, which then escalated into a riot in three phases. The protesters dismantled installations, set up roadblocks, formed umbrella formations and obstructed roads, and threw petrol bombs, bricks and the like at Government Headquarters and the police, paralysing traffic and endangering public safety. The police finally fired tear gas and used water cannon to disperse the crowd, arresting seven defendants who pleaded guilty.
Sentencing, having regard to the Court of Appeal and similar Admiralty riot cases, must take into account the scale of the riot, the number of participants, the extent of violence and damage, duration, impact on public order and the role played by the defendant, while balancing deterrence with individual circumstances.
In this case, approximately 500 people staged a riot in three phases. The protesters used umbrella formations, obstacles and threw dangerous objects, posing a serious threat to Government Headquarters and the public. The circumstances are grave and require severe punishment; however, as the defendant is a first-time offender, young, and has pleaded guilty with remorse, a sentence reduction is warranted.
The judge considered that although the defendant was not the principal offender, he organised umbrella formations on the front line and supported violence, playing a catalytic role; taking into account that he was influenced by the social atmosphere at the time and acted on impulse, and that he showed remorse and pleaded guilty, a discretionary sentence reduction is appropriate.
The judge ultimately sentenced the seven defendants to immediate imprisonment ranging from 30 months and two weeks to 36 months, to demonstrate severe punishment and serve as a warning. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書