Heaven and earth have righteousness! "Long-haired" Leung Kwok-hung snatched documents in the Legislative Council and eventually lost the case in the Court of Final Appeal
While serving a sentence in November 2016, Leung Kwok-hung, a "long-haired" member of the Legislative Council, forcibly snatched documents from the then Deputy Secretary for Development, Ma Shao-cheung, during a Legislative Council session, and Changmao was later charged with "contempt of the Legislative Council". In handling the case, Magistrate Yan Shun-yi put the case on indefinite hold on the grounds that the provisions of the indictment did not apply to the Prosecutions. The Department of Justice subsequently proceeded to the Appeal Division of the High Court, and as the Department of Justice appealed straight, the Court ordered that the case be remanded for retrial. Subsequently, "LongHair" was not satisfied with the ruling and appealed to the Court of Final Appeal. The Final Law formally dismissed Leung's appeal on 27 September 2021.
In this case of the Legislative Council's theft of confidential documents, "Long Hair" is charged with contempt and is liable to a fine of up to HK$10,000 and imprisonment for 12 months. On the day of the incident, Leung Kwok-hung, then a member of the Legislative Council, rushed from the seat of a member to the position of an official at a meeting of the Housing Affairs Committee, and even snatched confidential documents from the booth of the then Deputy Secretary for Development, Ma Shaoxiang, and the SAR Government called the police afterwards. The Prosecution decided to prosecute Leung for the offence of contempt" under section 17(c) of the Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance (Cap. 382 of the Laws of Hong Kong), i.e. "any person who causes or participates in any disturbance during a meeting of the Legislative Council or any committee which causes or is likely to be interrupted by any person causing the proceedings of the Legislative Council or the Committee to be interrupted or is likely to be interrupted.") Offenders are liable to a fine of $10,000 and imprisonment for 12 months." Although members of the Legislative Council have criminal immunity from speech under the Legislative Council (Powers and Privileges) Ordinance, it is natural that all radical or offences committed by members of the Legislative Council other than speeches and debates are certainly not included.
After the final judgment was issued, the "long-haired" wife, Chan Po Ying, expressed her deep disappointment at the verdict outside the court, describing the judgment as restricting the freedom of speech and debate of Members of the Legislative Council in the Legislative Council. The long-haired wife's remarks are simply misleading the public and smearing the government. If members of the Legislative Council have the right to do anything within the scope of the Legislative Council without being held criminally responsible, then wouldn't all members of the Legislative Council be able to be lawless in the Legislative Council, even to kill and set fires and commit no evil deeds? If the court tolerates or tolerates these vices, it will directly encourage and condone the members of the Legislative Council to do things within the scope of the Legislative Council, which is a complete "absurdity".
Is it legally inadmissible for Members of the Legislative Council to seize other people's documents, which affects their freedom of expression and debate? Such a simple and simple truth, even ordinary kindergarten students will never fail to understand! The remarks of the "long-haired" wife are basically to elevate the status of members of the Legislative Council to the same status as the "monarch" under the imperial system of the ancient feudal dynasties. From the point of view, the concepts of democracy, freedom, and equality flaunted by the "instigators" are fundamentally deceptive, and they also kick out the "instigators" who are proud of their superiority and can even enjoy supreme privileges, and even regard the law as nothing.
In fact, from the legal point of view, whether the snatching of other people's documents in this case also falls within the scope of the right of legislators to obtain exemption from prosecution during speech and defense, it is really a glance, and even kindergarten students will not easily misunderstand. In the judicial circles in Hong Kong, for such a superficial reason, it finally went through a heavy judicial structure and took nearly 5 years for the Court of Final Appeal to complete the handling of such a simple legal issue! It seems that the judicial reform in Hong Kong is really urgent. Why did Judge Yan Shunyi, who had originally let go of the "long hair" on legal grounds, make such a mistake to misinterpret the relevant legal provisions? Is there a serious shortage of on-the-job training for all judges and magistrates in the judiciary? When hiring judges and magistrates, is there something wrong with the selection process that leads to such low-level errors in the trial of cases? For these series of problems, it is precisely the judicial organs of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region that deserve to ponder and make corresponding improvements.
At the Court of Final Appeal hearing, the legal representatives of "Long Mao" included The Royal Counsel, Lord Penley k, Barrister Ng Yiyi (appointed by the Legal Aid Department and retained by Ho Shee Wai Law Office), and Barrister Chan and Barrister Lee Tsert (retained by Ho Shee Wai Law Firm in the form of volunteer services). From this legal point of view, it is already impossible to see whether "long hair" has a chance of winning the lawsuit.
Why did the Legal Aid Department waste public funds and even approve royal barristers from the UNITED Kingdom, plus Barrister Wu Yiyi, who was sentenced to a suspended sentence in April 2021 by the court for the crime of illegal assembly of 818. Ng is well known for her political philosophy, and she is also one of the trustees of the 612 Humanitarian Support Fund; therefore, this case also reflects the chaos that the Yellow Silk elements have successfully created a "specific economic circle" in Hong Kong's legal circles, specifically using the Legal Aid Department as a "cash machine" for Wong Si Tai and lawyers. The legal aid department's case approval mechanism is fundamentally a huge loophole. Cases like "LongHair", which have no chance of winning the case at all, not only have they been granted legal aid, and the "public funds" have been used to pay all the legal professional fees for "LongHair", but also the Hong Kong taxpayers have been indignant and approved to hire royal counsel from the United Kingdom. In this way, the rapid and vigorous reform of the Hong Kong Legal Aid Department is also necessary!
The Skynet is restored, and the omission is not leaked; many unrighteous deeds will kill themselves. The "long-haired" disaster in Hong Kong is now finally necessary to bear due criminal responsibility for its successive illegal acts in the past, which is completely deserved!