 |
In November 2019 students clashed with police at CUHK
|
Yesterday five former Chinese University students were jailed for up to 59 months each for rioting and flouting a ban on wearing masks at public gatherings during clashes with police on the university campus in November 2019.
When handing down the sentences to the five at West Kowloon Court, Deputy Judge Kathie Cheung Kit-yee said the defendants must have chosen to remain at the scene either to take part in the violence or abet the criminal acts of their comrades.
She said the lack of evidence over the defendants' level of involvement was no reason to reduce their jail sentences, because all participants in a riot shared the same culpability regardless of their roles in it.
 |
5 were arrested at the bridge near CUHK entrance
|
"Hong Kong is a place which upholds the rule of law, and a peaceful and tranquil community which shows no tolerance aimless acts that seriously disturb the peace, especially those targeting law enforcement officers," Cheung said.
Three men aged 23 and one aged 20 were all sentenced to 57 months in jail, while one female defendant, Foo Hoi-ching, 23, was handed a 59-month sentence.
The five were arrested near the bridge near CUHK's entrance where protesters hurled objects at police. At the time protesters had just thrown 23 Molotov cocktails and other hard objects at police.
Foo, a nursing student, remained defiant during mitigation, saying she was not sorry for what she had done and found Cheung's ruling unreasonable.
She wrote a letter to the court that was quickly translated on Twitter by Tsui Lok-man, a former assistant professor at CUHK's School of Journalism and Communication:
 |
Foo says authorities free to interpret the law
|
"First of all, this letter of plea is not intended to gain the mercy of the judge.
"In asking for the background report, I honestly have no regrets for my actions, and I also have nothing to say to the judge in my plea, because I do not agree with the law itself, nor do I feel I have done anything wrong.
"Simply put, I do not think this is a reasonable sentence. In the eyes of some people, 'the law is the law, and if you break the law, you need to bear responsibility'.
"Others may also believe that the court's ruling proves that the protesters' behaviour is wrong, and their actions in vain. But I believe that authority does not equal correctness.
"First of all, the laws of Hong Kong today are not recognized by its people, nor does society have any space to discuss whether the law is reasonable or not. Second, the Public Order Ordinance is vague by design, to enable the authorities to freely interpret and control it.
 |
She says the law controls people, not for justice
|
"After 2019, riot cases have increased rapidly, and the courts have given a new interpretation to the definition of a riot, such that increasingly more behaviour is now classified as "illegal behaviour", enabling more and more people to get convicted, and allowing the authorities to further repress dissidents.
"Under a totalitarian regime, the law is only a bloodless but violent tool of the authorities to control the people, and the court is not a place of justice.
"In such a place, only attention is being paid to social order on a surface level, but the root cause of what is tearing the society apart is ignored.
"When the penalties for political cases gets heavier, some defendants will please guilty or appeal to the judge, in order to reduce their sentence, but this does not necessarily mean they agree that the current law is moral or just.
 |
Foo no longer believes in the HK judicial system
|
"The judge may point out that if you are not satisfied with the ruling, you can appeal. However, I no longer believe in Hong Kong's judicial system, and even the highest courts may not listen to the voices of dissidents.
"I just want to take this opportunity to express my dissatisfaction. If the court hears what I have said, and believes that it is justified in giving me a heavy sentence to make me regret and reflect, then it will be just as it is."
法官閣下:
首先表明,我無意以這封求情信來博取法官閣下的憐憫。
我索取背景報告時,我坦言對於自己的行為並無後悔,亦沒有說話要向法官閣下求情,因為我並不認同法例本身,亦不覺得自己有做錯的地方。簡單而言,我不認為這是合理的判決。
在某部分人眼中,示威者「犯法就係犯法,就係要負責」,有些人亦可能認為法庭的裁決證明了示威者的行為是錯誤,是徒勞無功的。但我認為,權威並不代表正確。
首先,香港現時的法律,並非由人民共同認可,社會並沒有空間討論現行法律合理與否。其次,暴動條例的定義本來就模糊不清,以便政權靈活解釋和操控。2019年後暴動案件急升,法庭時而重新詮譯暴動定義,令更多行為被列為「法律不認可的行為」,從而令更多人入罪,令政權得以打壓異見者。
極權下的法律只是政權用以規範人民行為的不流血暴力手段,而法庭也不是一個彰顯公義的地方。這裏只會流於表面地關注社會秩序,並不會著眼社會撕裂的根本原因。
當政治案件的刑罰日益加重,有些被告會選擇認罪或向法官求情,以減輕刑期,但或許並不代表他們認同現行法律具有道德正當性。法官閣下可能會指出,若不滿閣下裁決,大可以申請上訴。然而,本人已不再相信香港的司法制度,再高級的法庭亦不見得會聆聽異見者的聲音。
我只是希望藉此機會表達我的不滿。如果法庭聽畢本人以上的言論,認為可以用重判形式令本人從而後悔及反省,那便悉隨尊便。