倫敦HK Watch對梁天琦「暴動」罪成的睇法(曾焯文譯)HK Watch’s View of Edward Leung’s Riot Conviction (Trans. Chapman Chen)

Share This:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

高院旺角暴動案,陪審團今日裁決梁天琦暴動罪名成立。倫敦人權組織Hong Kong Watch認為:梁天琦「暴動」罪名成立,可能判監十年,顯示「公安條例」迫切需要改革,事關當局正利用「公安條例」過份懲罰政治示威者。「公安條例」嚴厲懲罰涉及「非法集會」,「擾亂公共場所秩序」和「暴動」的抗議人士,但並無對這些罪行提供嚴謹定義。

梁天琦被判暴動罪名成立,基礎乃係如果「非法集會」導致「破壞安寧」,事件即屬暴動。「非法集會」和「破壞安寧」定義模糊,加上「暴動」或「非法集會」判刑極端,顯示此乃特別有效的政治鎮壓工具。根據「公安條例」,無論扔磚者抑或路過旁觀者,都可能當暴徒檢控。

梁天琦承認當晚有錯。然而,這表示,梁天琦在騷亂開始之前,痛斥一名打年輕女性的警察之後,就已被捕。他已承認與這次警民衝突有關的罪行(按:襲警),此罪刑罰輕於暴動。本應如此,但根據「公安條例」的模糊定義,他亦是「暴徒」,因此看來可能要在獄中度過青春歲月。

聯合國一再譴責「公安條例」,過分限制集會、言論自由。這是殖民地時代的法律,因此英國對這定義不明確的法例負有部分責任。根據中英聯合聲明和國際法,英國有責任促進香港人權:我們應該帶頭呼籲香港政府改革公安條例,使其符合國際人權標準。

資料來源:https://www.hongkongwatch.org/all-posts/2018/5/18/the-hong-kong-watch-view-on-the-conviction-of-edward-leung-to-rioting-charges

The Hong Kong Watch view on the conviction of Edward Leung to ‘rioting’ charges

The conviction of Edward Leung Tin-kei on rioting charges, with a sentence of up to ten years in jail, shows that the Public Order Ordinance is urgently in need of reform because it is being used to disproportionately punish political protestors in Hong Kong.
The Public Order Ordinance places severe punishments on protestors involved in ‘unlawful assembly’, ‘disorder in public places’ and ‘rioting’ without providing sufficiently tight definitions of what these crimes are.

Edward Leung Tin-kei has been convicted of rioting on the basis that an event is a riot if an ‘unlawful assembly’ leads to a ‘breach of the peace.’ The vague definitions of ‘unlawful assembly’ and ‘breach of the peace’, coupled with the extreme sentences that are attached to ‘rioting’ or ‘illegal assembly’ crimes, mean that this is a particularly effective tool of political suppression. Whether someone was throwing bricks or an accidental observer, under the Public Order Ordinance they could be prosecuted as rioters.

Edward has admitted that he was at fault that evening. This meant, critically however, that he was arrested before the unrest started, after confronting a police officer who was hitting a young woman. He has pleaded guilty for the crime relating to this confrontation, which carries a lesser sentence. That should have been it, but under the Public Order Ordinance’s vague definitions he is also a ‘rioter’ and looks likely to be locked up for the best years of his life as a result.

The Public Order Ordinance has been repeatedly condemned by the United Nations for excessively curtailing freedom of assembly and expression. It is a colonial era law and the United Kingdom are therefore partially responsible for this poorly defined piece of legislation. The United Kingdom are obliged under the Sino-British Joint Declaration and international law to promote human rights in Hong Kong; we should lead the calls for the Hong Kong government to reform the Public Order Ordinance to bring it in line with international rights standards.


Share This:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Comments