Pro-government demonstrators demand resignation of Hong Kong Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma over ‘lenience’ shown to democracy activists
- 100 people from Defend Hong Kong Campaign rally outside Court of Final Appeal, alleging judges have helped offenders by bailing them
- But legal expert Eric Cheung says judges give bail based on reasoning and one’s political stance is never taken into account in decision-making
Pro-government protesters in Hong Kong have demanded the resignation of Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li, saying judges were too lenient in granting bail to those charged over the protests and had failed to hand down deterrent sentences to convicted people.
About 100 people from Defend Hong Kong Campaign held a rally outside the Court of Final Appeal in Central on Thursday, waving the Chinese flag and signs that read: “Police arrest people, the courts release people”.
“We feel the judges have sometimes helped those who committed offences,” Kenny Po Chun-chung, the group’s president, said.
But judicial officers and a legal expert have dismissed the allegation, saying the courts always acted in accordance with the law.
The judiciary’s press and public relations office said: “The courts handle cases strictly in accordance with the law and always ensure fairness.”
The concern group also urged Ma to set up an independent commission, headed by the chief executive and composed of members from the judiciary, government and the public to review sentencing.
It cited the example of eight pro-democracy activists who were spared a jail term on Wednesday for offences relating to a protest against Beijing’s interpretation of Hong Kong’s mini-constitution three years ago. They were either given a suspended jail term or community service.
How can people like Joshua Wong remain above the law, go to Germany and ask other countries to sanction Hong Kong?
Po also pointed out the case of activist Joshua Wong Chi-fung, who was charged with three offences of organising, inciting and taking part in an illegal assembly when crowds besieged the police headquarters in Wan Chai on June 21. He was bailed on August 30, the same day as his arrest.
Wong was jailed in early 2019 for remaining at a protest site during the 2014 Occupy protests violating a court ban, a record which Po said should have prevented him from being bailed this time.
“How can people like Joshua Wong remain above the law, go to Germany and ask other countries to sanction Hong Kong?” Po said.
Will extradition bill withdrawal appease or embolden Hong Kong protesters?
Of the more than 1,300 people arrested since protests against the extradition bill – which the city’s leader has announced will be withdrawn – erupted in early June, at least 191 have been charged with offences ranging from assaulting a police officer to rioting. Among those charged, 164 have been granted bail.
The concern group said the judges’ bail decisions had sent the “wrong signals to young people”, implicitly encouraging them to take part in the movement.
“I feel the legal system is biased. If they didn’t know judges would give them bail or light sentences, they would not have been so reckless,” Lam Ka-miu, a housewife at the rally, said.
But principal lecturer in law at the University of Hong Kong Eric Cheung Tat-ming said whether a defendant would be given bail or not depended largely on the person’s risk of absconding, whether he would interfere with witnesses and whether he would commit another crime while on bail.
“The general principle is to grant bail,” he said. “The court looks at these factors and determines whether they could be offset by the bail conditions.”
Cheung said he could not see a pattern of protesters being given light sentences, and that one’s political stance was never taken into account.
He urged the public to look at judges’ reasoning rather than the results.
Bill withdrawal not to compromise with violent protesters, chief secretary says
A spokesman from the Department of Justice said: “Our courts administer justice in full accordance with the law and admissible evidence before it.”
“The community should not make any arbitrary or unfair criticisms which seek to undermine the integrity or impartiality of the judiciary,” he added.
Additional reporting by Chris Lau and Brian Wong
