Secretary for Justice v. Leung Wing Lai
Read the full judgment text of FAMC 52/2017 on BabelCite. This FAMC judgment.
1. The present applicants for bail are three of the 13 defendants who were convicted of unlawful assembly and certain other offences arising out of a demonstration in the Legislative Council Complex on 13 June 2014. After dismissal of their appeals, the sentences imposed by the magistrate were increased by the Court of Appeal on a sentence review brought by the Secretary for Justice.
Cited by 2 cases
|
FAMC Nos. 52, 53 & 54 of 2017 [2018] HKCFA 10 IN THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NOS. 52, 53 & 54 OF 2017 (CRIMINAL) (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM CAAR NO. 3 OF 2016) _______________________ BETWEEN
_______________________ Before: Mr Justice Ribeiro Acting CJ in Chambers Date of Hearing and Ruling: 7 February 2018 _______________________ RULING ON BAIL _______________________ Mr Justice Ribeiro Acting CJ： 1.The present applicants for bail are three of the 13 defendants who were convicted of unlawful assembly and certain other offences arising out of a demonstration in the Legislative Council Complex on 13 June 2014. After dismissal of their appeals, the sentences imposed by the magistrate were increased by the Court of Appeal on a sentence review brought by the Secretary for Justice. 2.All 13 have applied for leave to appeal and, for the reasons explained in my Ruling dated 24 November 2017[1] and the subsequent Ruling of Ma CJ dated 29 December 2017,[2] a total of 10 of the applicants have been granted bail pending the hearing of the leave application. The present applicants now apply for bail on like terms. 3.Because the grounds of appeal sought to be raised in the pending leave applications bear some similarity to the grounds of appeal which led this Court to grant leave in Secretary for Justice v Wong Chi Fung and others,[3] the Court of Appeal certified certain questions of law in the present case. For that reason, the view taken by Ma CJ and myself was that bail should exceptionally be granted because it was undesirable for a single Permanent Judge to refuse bail at the present stage on the basis that the appeal was not reasonably arguable, given the Court of Appeal’s certification. 4.As I emphasised in my Ruling, this should not be taken to suggest that the factual and other circumstances of the Wong Chi Fung case are comparable to the circumstances of the present case. The fact that judgment in the Wong Chi Fung case was handed down yesterday does not affect that position. 5.The Secretary for Justice does not oppose the grant of bail on appropriate terms, accepting that there is no flight risk and accepting that the applicants may have served all or a substantial part of their sentence before the hearing if bail is not granted. The arguability of the points sought to be raised in the leave application is not conceded, but the Secretary accepts that it cannot presently be said that the applications are doomed to fail. 6.Accordingly for the same reasons as those given in my earlier Ruling, I grant bail on terms which have been agreed between the parties, namely, for cash bail of $10,000 for each applicant and the usual terms as to remaining in Hong Kong, the surrender of travel documents, reporting to a specified police station and residing at a reported address. The details will be dealt with by my clerk. 7.I wish again to stress that the grant of bail does not imply that the Appeal Committee will accept that the proposed appeals are reasonably arguable. The applicants should understand that if they are refused leave to appeal or if leave is granted and their appeals fail, they will be required to return to prison to serve out their sentences. 8.Now that the judgment in the Wong Chi Fung case has been published, the Registrar will promptly fix dates for hearing of the leave application.
Mr Douglas Kwok, instructed by Bond Ng Solicitors, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Applicants (D4 & D10) in FAMC 52 & 54/2017 Mr Hectar Pun SC and Mr Anson Wong Yu Yat, instructed by Bond Ng Solicitors, for the Applicant (D6) in FAMC 53/2017 Mr Jonathan Man, SADPP and Mr Derek Lau, SPP of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent in FAMC 52, 53 & 54/2017 |
Other judgments that cite this case
Further hearings and rulings under FAMC 52/2017