My Take | Sandwich brigade makes Hong Kong judiciary suffer

Well, let’s see. As offensive weapons go, do you consider animal entrails or soggy sandwiches more dangerous? I admit the former is more disgusting. On the other hand, a spoiled tuna fish sandwich isn’t a pretty sight either. But in a court of law, throwing either of them at people you despise as an act of protest probably doesn’t make much of a difference when it comes to conviction and sentencing.

But let’s consider a legal precedent. Last year, three men were jailed nine to 18 weeks for throwing entrails at Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, owner of the anti-communist newspaper Apple Daily, during the Occupy protests in 2014. Predictably, the opposition cheered and no one came out ridiculing the court ruling. Why? Because Lai was one of them, someone who has given millions to various opposition and anti-government parties and causes over many years.

In fact, Ng had himself to blame for the court outcome. Those who attacked Lai had proper legal representation. Ng represented himself. At one point, he told the court he threw the sandwich at Leung because the ex-leader’s “very smug” expression had encouraged him to do it. While Leung haters might sympathise with Ng, that kind of testimony would not have endeared a defendant to a judge.