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 on the afternoon of 29 September 2019, at around four o’clock, the eleven defendants took part in a gathering of about five hundred protesters outside the Government Headquarters in Admiralty, occupied Harcourt Road, hurled miscellaneous objects and petrol bombs at the headquarters, set fires to damage water barriers, and despite the police having issued yellow, blue and black flag warnings on multiple occasions, the protesters continued their disturbances; the police then launched raids from various exits, surrounding and arresting the eleven defendants individually.
According to section 19(1) and (2) of Cap. 245 of the Public Order Ordinance, anyone participating in a riot in a public place may be sentenced to a maximum of ten years’ imprisonment.
The defendants were fully aware that the situation had escalated into a riot, yet they remained with the group, possessed protective and offensive equipment, and took part in the on-site actions, thereby constituting participatory offences. It is difficult for them to claim that they had withdrawn from the riot; they must be severely punished to maintain public order.
The judge believed that the prosecution had produced evidence beyond reasonable doubt; the protesters’ actions were organised, highly mobile and endangered public peace, and the defendants, as assistants and encouragers, should be convicted.
All eleven defendants were convicted of the charge of rioting. (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 judgement states that at around 4:00 pm on 29 September 2019, approximately 500 protesters occupied the eastbound and westbound lanes of Harcourt Road outside the Government Headquarters in Admiralty, threw miscellaneous objects and petrol bombs, set fires and damaged defensive water-filled barriers. The police issued multiple warnings to no avail, and after the riot continued for over twenty minutes a sudden dispersal operation was launched, ultimately resulting in the arrest of eleven defendants around the various exits.
According to Section 19 of the Public Order Ordinance and relevant case law, sentencing must consider: whether the riot was premeditated, the number of participants, the use of violence and weapons, the scale and scope of the riot, the duration and continuation despite repeated warnings, the extent of property damage or personal injury caused, the disturbance to the public and the burden on public expenditure, the impact on community relations, the defendant’s role and level of participation in the riot, and whether other offences were committed concurrently.
In this case, the riot was highly spontaneous, involved a large number of participants, targeted the Government Headquarters and escalated in violence, requiring significant deterrence. However, the defendants were neither leaders nor organisers, had no prior convictions, pleaded guilty saving judicial resources, had good backgrounds, showed remorse, and the younger defendants especially needed a chance at rehabilitation, so the sentencing starting point has been reduced from four to five years to three and a half years’ imprisonment.
The judge considers the offence of rioting to be serious, requiring a balance between societal deterrence and the characteristics of the individual case. The defendants were merely facilitators and encouragers, not the main instigators, and some were young and should be subject to reformatory measures; the remaining defendants should face custodial sentences to uphold the authority of the law.
The fourth and eighth defendants were sentenced to be placed in a reformatory, and the remaining defendants were each sentenced to three years and six months’ imprisonment. (Translated from Chinese to English by AI)
查看完整判刑理由書