三级aa视频在线观看-三级国产-三级国产精品一区二区-三级国产三级在线-三级国产在线

Global EditionASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
HongKong Comment(1)

Case against nine'Occupy'leaders is a weighty one

By Lawrence Ma | HK Edition | Updated: 2017-04-06 06:26
Share
Share - WeChat

The public has finally seen the three principal organizers of the illegal "Occupy Central"movement - law professor Benny Tai Yiu-ting, clergyman Chu Yiu-ming and sociology academic Chan Kin-man - together with some "pan-democratic" lawmakers and a few student leaders, totaling nine,charged by the city's Department of Justice.

The cases are seen as the most crucial to reach the courts since the 79-day illegal sit-in broke out in 2014.

The nine were alleged to have committed various offences - conspiracy to commit public nuisance; inciting others to commit public nuisance; and inciting people to incite others to commit public nuisance.

The cases have drawn public attention and it is significant that people who care about the cases know their nature and how similar ones have been dealt with.

Conspiracy and incitement were common law offenses but now they have been incorporated into statute: s 159A Crimes Ordinance (Cap 200) for conspiracy and s 101C Criminal Procedure Ordinance (Cap 221) for incitement respectively. Penalty for conspiracy or incitement is commensurate with the crime that the defendant conspired or incited others to commit. So if the crime in question is one of common assault, which carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison, the conspirator or inciter can be sentenced to no more than one year.

Public nuisance is a common law offense and maximum penalty for all common law offenses in Hong Kong is seven years. The most authoritative definition of "public nuisance" is by the UK House of Lords in R v Rimmington(2006) 1 AC 459 that when a person did an act not warranted by law and the effect of the act was to endanger the life, health, property or comfort of the public, or to obstruct the public in the exercise of rights common to everyone. The act must have caused injury to the community as a whole or a significant section of it; and the accused could reasonably foresee or could have known the consequence of his act.

Thus, in R v Rimmington(2006) 1 AC 459, sending 538 letters and packages containing racially offensive material to several people was not public nuisance as the public element was lacking. And in R v Goldstein (2006) 1 AC 459, sending an old friend an envelope containing a check in repayment of a debt, together with a small quantity of salt as a humorous gesture which the recipient would have understood as a joke - but some salt leaked onto the hands of postal worker who, fearing the salt might be anthrax, raised the alarm so the building was evacuated and the second delivery of post for that day was canceled - was held not to be a public nuisance as it was not possible for the defendant to foresee.

There are only three reported cases in Hong Kong so far. In HKSAR v Pearce (No 1) (2006) 3 HKC 105, Matt Pearce, a political activist, who aimed to propagandize on social justice, democracy and human rights through non-violent action, sought to draw the attention of the public by dressing in a horse costume and running on to the race track for two minutes. The race, televised to more than 13 countries and watched by a 48,000-strong crowd, was delayed one minute. He also dressed in a Spider-Man costume and climbed up a ladder to the podium of a commercial building in Central with a large banner. A large pedestrian crowd gathered to watch him on Queen's Road Central and firemen had to place a rescue cushion below the building in case he jumped or fell. Traffic was jammed for two hours. He was sentenced to 21 days imprisonment but the term was suspended for 18 months.

In HKSAR v Pearce (No 2) (2009) 4 HKLRD 11, the same Matt Pearce, again in August 2008, on the day of the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics, protested on the Tsing Ma Bridge. His action held up traffic both to and from the airport, with cars queuing for several kilometers; and he was sentenced to 6 months imprisonment.

In HKSAR v Chow Pit-leung(2010) HKCU 614, defendant taxi drivers disgruntled with certain taxi fare adjustments launched by the transport department parked their taxis on the North Lantau Highway blocking all lanes and preventing road travel from Lantau Island to Kowloon, as well as all vehicle access to and from the airport. The blockade lasted from 9 pm on Dec 3, 2008 to 2 am on Dec 4, lasting five hours. Defendant taxi drivers ignored police requests to drive away and in the end police had to break open taxi windows to tow them away. Defendants were initially sentenced to two months imprisonment but on appeal their sentences were reduced to a suspended sentence of 18 months.

The case against the nine "Occupy" defendants is a strong one. Their conspiracy and incitement did cause injury to a large section of the community, if not the entire population of Hong Kong.

(HK Edition 04/06/2017 page8)

Today's Top News

Editor's picks

Most Viewed

Top
BACK TO THE TOP
English
Copyright 1995 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

Registration Number: 130349
FOLLOW US
主站蜘蛛池模板: 国产农村妇女一级毛片视频片 | 射狠狠| 欧美日韩成人高清色视频 | 国产成人综合欧美精品久久 | 1024国产精品 | 国产一级毛片卡 | 亚洲国产成人综合 | 麻豆久久精品免费看国产 | 国产a级免费 | 妖精视频在线观看网站 | 丰满的大乳老师三级在线观看 | 欧美簧片 | 91欧美激情一区二区三区成人 | 国产一级视频免费 | 丁香激情网 | 欧美日韩一本大道香蕉欧美 | 亚洲精品97福利在线 | 亚洲欧美日韩网站 | 国产三级网址 | 不卡一级毛片免费高清 | 精品国产一区二区三区四 | 日本v片免费一区二区三区 日本wwwwwxxxxx | 久久青青视频 | 日韩区欧美区 | 特黄特级毛片免费视 | 国产精品jlzz视频 | 青春草在线视频精品 | 欧美色欧美亚洲高清在线视频 | 青青操免费在线视频 | 18hd xxxx国产在线 | 国内精品视频一区二区三区八戒 | 中文字幕一区二区三区不卡 | 九九免费高清在线观看视频 | 香蕉久久a毛片 | 久久一本日韩精品中文字幕屁孩 | 92午夜影院 | 国产精品无码专区在线观看 | 九九国产精品九九 | 在线视频免费观看a毛片 | 亚洲综合日韩精品欧美综合区 | 国产伦码精品一区二区 |