【政識法字】選舉呈請DQ 法庭可否把關?

DQ風波,還未完結。2016年起,香港政府掌控了篩選選舉參選人的權利;2016年7月,陳浩天和梁天琦等五名參選人基於其政治主張,被選舉主任裁定提名無效,同年11月,政府入稟法庭,要求法庭裁定梁頌恆和游蕙禎宣誓無效,高等法院原訟庭聽取雙方陳詞後、押後宣判的期間,人大常委就《基本法》第104條(下稱「第104條」)作出解釋(下稱「釋法」),它不但解釋第104條,更就其作出「補充」,變相「加料」。釋法後,梁游二人被DQ,政府亦再入稟法庭,要求法庭裁定姚松炎、劉小麗、羅冠聰、梁國雄四位議員宣誓無效。2017年7月,四名議員被法庭裁定宣誓無效,即被DQ。2018年3月和11月的立法會補選,選舉主任亦一而再、再而三地運用其權力裁定若干參選人的提名無效。

海外港人組織華府成立 游說美國國會通過《香港人權及民主法案》

海外港人組織「Hong Kong Democracy Council US(HKDC)」,17日正式宣佈在美國首都華盛頓成立,積極推動游說工作,爭取美國方面訂立支持香港的相關法例。

Entertainer (and etiquette enforcer) Deanie Ip’s music blocked on mainland after anti-extradition rally

Veteran entertainer Deanie Ip had her music yanked from mainland streaming services in the mainland after she took part in a Monday’s anti-extradition bill march coinciding with the 22nd anniversary of Hong Kong’s handover to China.

法政匯思:囚

八月的香港很漫長很抑鬱,天氣如是,社會氣氛如是。因反東北發展及公民廣場案判決被改判監禁的十六位抗爭者所面對的,將會是更漫長更鬱結的日子。

香港監獄在那、「探監須知」、「如何寫信給在囚人士」對一般港人來說原本是「冷知識」,頓時令大家「長知識」。每天細閱媒體轉載抗爭者父母、小情人致在囚者的一字一句,無不心酸。

港聞 兩案爭論點不同 終院態度不利4子

4名民主派人士羅冠聰、梁國雄、劉小麗和姚松炎,早前亦被高等法院裁定宣誓無效,撤銷其議員資格,其中梁國雄已表明會上訴。法政匯思成員、大律師石書銘表示,一些法律原則問題,如宣誓的條件、人大釋法等,是無法再爭論,指在DQ4子案中,可以有爭拗空間的包括宣誓的方式「什麼叫莊重」,以及梁游案的法律原則未必可以套用在DQ4子身上。但石說,要挑戰DQ4子案原審時的事實裁斷有困難。

【聲援良心犯】戴耀廷反擊石永泰!黃瑞紅:爭公義不能用一般犯罪標準

大律師黃瑞紅今日亦有出席遊行。她說是次判刑,大眾關注的是東北案13人、雙學三子既已完成社會服務令但卻被刑期覆核。對大律師公會前主席石永泰今日說三人是「求仁得仁」,她說,法官不應該用一般犯罪的標準,來審判因爭取公義、人權而被檢控的人士。

至於本港法治是否已死?黃瑞紅說,在法例中仍有空間去捍衛市民的基本人權,未來會繼續進行這方面的工作。

【法政巴絲】都是法官的錯?

這幾天,已經有很多法律觀點分析雙學三子一案判決的量刑理據,在此不贅。今天想討論的,是針對法官的批評聲音。

雨傘運動是一場開宗明義的公民抗命。公民抗命是以和平的方式,不服從不公義的法律。違反法律的後果,就是被法律所制裁,即使法律被正確地使用,也是會產生這樣的後果。如果不是這樣,公民抗命如何能彰顯制度上的不公與殘缺?如何能彰顯,當政府和建制權力氾濫失衡時,法律(包括法官)也只會淪為當權者手中的一把刀,隨意砍下?

法政匯思就「反新界東北」及「926重奪公民廣場」刑期覆核裁決聲明 (Statement in response to recent Court of Appeal sentencing reviews)

於2017年8月15及17日,上訴庭分別就律政司提出「反新界東北」及「926重奪公民廣場」案件的刑期作出覆核,改判「反新界東北」案的13名被告人8至13 個月監禁及「926重奪公民廣場」案的黃之峰、羅冠聰及周永康三人6至8個月監禁,法政匯思對此裁決深感悲痛。(Upon the Secretary for Justice’s applications, the Court of Appeal this week reviewed the sentences for thirteen participants in the anti-northeast New Territories development protests and three prominent student leaders—Joshua Wong, Nathan Law and Alex Chow—involved in the re-taking of the Civic Square. The Court of Appeal overruled the original sentences in both cases and imposed eight to thirteen months of imprisonment on the thirteen protesters and six to eight months of imprisonment on the three student leaders. The Progressive Lawyers Group ("PLG") is deeply aggrieved by these judgments.)

Hong Kong’s government finally managed to put democracy fighter Joshua Wong behind bars

Three years after the 79-day Occupy protests calling for greater democracy in Hong Kong, the young leaders of the movement are going to jail.

Joshua Wong, 20, Nathan Law, 24, and Alex Chow, 26, were sentenced to six months, eight months, and seven months, respectively, by a court in Hong Kong today (Aug. 17) for their actions in the 2014 protests, also known as the Umbrella Movement. Wilson Leung, a practicing lawyer in Hong Kong and member of the Progressive Lawyers Group, said that he still believes judges in Hong Kong are independent of the government. “However, we strongly disagree with the government treating political problems as ‘law and order’ problems and focusing on the prosecution of protestors,” he said.

Political Prisoners in Hong Kong

On August 17, a Hong Kong appeals court sentenced student democracy activists Joshua Wong, Alex Chow, and Nathan Law to six to eight months imprisonment. The three had earlier been convicted of crimes related to unlawful assembly during a demonstration in 2014 when they had crossed a police barrier, but the lower court had sentenced them only to community service and a suspended jail sentence, arguing that their breach had been a form of political expression. But even in Hong Kong, a city which has enjoyed political freedoms absent elsewhere in China, it was the preservation of “public order” the court chose to emphasize. “To disrupt public order and public peace in the name of free exercise of powers,” said court Vice President Wally Yeung Chun-kuen, “will cause our society to descend into chaos.” The new sentence, which the three plan to appeal, also carries a five-year prohibition on running for elected office in Hong Kong. Progressive Lawyers Group member Alvin Y.H. Cheung was interviewed by ChinaFile about the jailed activists.

Hong Kong democracy campaigners jailed over anti-China protests

Hong Kong’s democracy movement has suffered the latest setback in what has been a punishing year after three of its most influential young leaders were jailed for their roles in a protest at the start of a 79-day anti-government occupation known as the umbrella movement. “It smacks of political imprisonment, plain and simple,” said Jason Ng, a member of the Progressive Lawyers Group and the author of Umbrellas in Bloom, a book about Hong Kong’s youth protest movement.

Hong Kong student leaders jailed over pro-democracy protest tied to Umbrella Movement

Nearly three years ago, several Hong Kong youth with hopes of greater democracy led a downtown protest that ballooned into thousands and lasted for 79 days. Now, they’re going to jail. “It felt like a punch in the stomach,” said Jason Y. Ng, a lawyer, a member of the Progressive Lawyers Group and personal friend of Wong’s, who has written a book about the Umbrella Movement.

義賣支持DQ4 (Charity Sale in Support of DQ4)

為支援DQ4的訴訟及其工作,法政匯思將出售300條DQ4手中的毛巾,全數不扣除成本撥捐「守護公義基金」。每條毛巾售價$100,閣下亦可額外捐款。如有興趣支持,請留言或私訊本專頁,我們會盡快回覆訂購詳情。敬請有錢出錢,有力出力及廣傳此帖,多謝支持!

【法政巴絲】山雨已來風滿樓

在皇后大道中,手持著新鮮買來的馳名cupcakes散水餅。十分鐘前,我在邊check手機邊在蛋糕店付款。兩手都忙著,手機不斷有訊息。十分鐘的路程回到律師樓,老闆不在,整層樓都彌漫著一陣肅穆。我靜靜地放下cupcakes,秘書小姐親切的向我苦笑、intern同事望了我一眼,帶點無奈地說謝謝。我坐下,方才有時間查看手機,新聞和msg groups盡是同一個主題:立法會四人被DQ了。

【DQ風波.博評】原訴法院「四議員宣誓案」:釋法與法治十問十答

今個星期,按《01博評》邀請,再暫停寫親子,與大家說說法律。

昨日,高等法院就羅冠聰、梁國雄、劉小麗、姚松炎的立法會就職宣誓案頒佈判辭。區慶祥大法官的判辭長達112頁,覆蓋甚廣。各傳媒已就判辭內容廣泛引述,不少法律界人士亦已就判辭的實質法律、法律程序或政治影響發表意見,我亦無意在此重複他人已做的具體法律分析。

不過,我留意到在判辭頒佈後,有些人說它是彰顯法治、有些人說是法治已死。我想趁這個機會以問答形式再重溫一下人大常委釋法機制與法治的關係,然後再簡短地看看今次「四議員宣誓案」的法治討論。

Hong Kong lawmaker disqualification ruling ‘opens huge floodgate’, lawyers say

Progressive Lawyers Group convener Kevin Yam Kin-fung said the judgment was far-reaching. He said a lawmaker could now even be held accountable for holding an umbrella while taking an oath.

“It opens a huge floodgate,” he said, and could have a chilling effect on lawmakers in future.

4 Hong Kong lawmakers disqualified, fueling worries about Beijing’s influence

Four pro-democracy lawmakers in Hong Kong have been disqualified from their posts for failing to take their oaths properly, a court ruled Friday. That effectively changes the balance of power in the entire legislature, according to Antony Dapiran, a Hong Kong-based lawyer and author who's just written a book about dissent in the city.

"It's pretty bad for rule of law in Hong Kong when you see the courts being used to kick out democratic lawmakers like this," Dapiran told CNN. "Hong Kong can no longer pretend to (be) any kind of democracy."

Four pro-democracy lawmakers disqualified from Hong Kong parliament

(USA Today) In a blow to the pro-democracy movement, four opposition lawmakers were disqualified from Hong Kong’s parliament Friday over charges that they did not take their swearing-in oaths seriously. “[The court ruling] will declaw and decimate the opposition bloc,” said Jason Y. Ng, a Hong Kong lawyer, Progressive Lawyers Group member, author and social activist.