<轉載自2018年6月5日 明報 社評>
高等法院審理佔領旺角藐視法庭案節外生枝，內地女子唐琳玲在法庭拍照，衍生另一宗藐視法庭案，最終唐被判囚7天，兼要支付近20萬元懲罰訟費。香港是法治社會，司法過程不容任何形式干擾，無論是本地人還是非香港居民都必須遵守法庭規矩，近期接連有人無視警告在庭內拍攝，法庭有必要提醒公眾切勿以身試法。近年本港多宗牽涉政治爭議的案件，都鬧出有人涉嫌藐視法庭的風波，傷害法治根基，風氣絕不可長。社會有必要發出清楚信息，維護法庭權威。
庭上拍照惹風波 干擾司法成禍患
2014年佔旺清場，多人涉嫌違反法庭禁制令。上月控方開案陳辭，唐琳玲在庭內拍攝並上傳照片，其手機內有最少3張照片，清晰拍攝到庭上答辯人、控辯雙方律師容貌。唐琳玲辯稱對法庭和法官「非常尊重」、「沒有任何藐視心態」，對事件表達悔意和道歉；法官陳慶偉亦相信，唐一心來旁聽，是想了解香港法律制度，拍照目的只為向內地朋友炫耀在香港法庭聽審，然而唐的行為，明顯違反法庭「不准拍攝」規定。唐琳玲以香港與內地法律差異作為自辯理由，形容拍照是「小事」，然而各處鄉村各處例，需要入鄉隨俗，兩地司法制度差異，並非毋須遵守本港法庭規則的理由。
雖然佔旺藐視法庭案，並非由陪審團處理，然而高院審訊不時會有陪審團，如果人人不理法庭規矩，隨便拍照，陪審員難免憂慮身分曝光，心理壓力大增，有可能影響裁決，損害本港法治。今次是本港首宗針對高院法庭拍照的藐視法庭案，證據充分，法庭有必要利用這次機會，向社會發出清晰信息，不容干擾司法程序。唐女自惹官非，換來7天牢獄和罰款20萬元，是一次代價高昂的教訓。
隨着智能手機和社交媒體普及，庭上拍照藐視法庭個案，在本港和其他奉行普通法的地區，都有增加之勢。2011年，英國一名19歲青年，為了回答朋友一通「身在何處」的短訊，用手機拍了一張身處法庭旁聽席的照片，結果換來監禁兩個月。前年，另一名19歲英國青年，因為在庭上拍照並上傳社交網站，留言美化受審的謀殺案疑犯，結果重囚15個月，同案另一個拍照的青年，則因為承認藐視法庭並道歉，獲從輕發落簽保守行為。主審法官判辭強調，必須以「嚴厲判罰」，阻遏年輕人濫用社交媒體侮辱司法機關、向受害者傷口灑鹽的行為，反映英國司法界認為，對於庭上拍照藐視法庭，有必要將歹意行為，與無失之心區分，對前者予以重罰。
藐視法庭損司法權威 遏阻歪風勿雙重標準
最近本港高院也發生多宗庭上拍照風波，最令人側目的是上月旺角暴動案，陪審團退庭商議期間，法官表示司法機構收到一封電郵，內附一幅攝有4名陪審員容貌的照片，電郵內容明顯有威嚇陪審團、挑戰司法機構權威之意。由於案件開審之初，曾有自稱內地遊客的人，在庭內拍照並以微信傳送相片，有人將兩件事扯在一起，惟平情而論，目前沒有證據，證明電郵照片就是該內地人所攝，拍照者也可以是其他人；外界也不清楚拍照者和發送電郵者的動機，究竟是想重判還是想讓被告脫罪。案件真相仍待查明，外界不應基於個人好惡和政治想像，過早妄下判斷。不過當日涉事內地人刪除照片後，執達吏未有留下資料便放行，做法亦有不妥。如何處理庭內有人拍攝的問題，司法機構確有需要檢討，並為前線人員提供指引。
香港社會氛圍政治化，每遇政治敏感案件，部分人往往忘記分寸，藐視法庭行為愈來愈多，庭上拍照僅是其中之一。旺角暴動案，一名婦人便因為在法庭叫囂和展示政治標語聲援被告，藐視法庭罪成罰款千元。庭上作出擾亂聆訊或侮辱司法人員行為、庭外發布誹謗法院言論、妨礙執行法院命令等情况，近年都有變本加厲之勢；社會上圍繞「刑事藐視法庭」的討論，亦變得愈來愈政治化。
不同政治光譜的人，只批評敵對立場者涉嫌藐視法庭的行為，卻對己方的藐視行徑視若無睹，又或輕輕帶過。無論是七警案、朱經緯案還是雙學三子入獄，都有人肆意攻擊法院判決；過去數年因為不滿裁決辱罵法官，也不是某一派別獨有的言行。旺角暴動審訊，有人拍照企圖威嚇陪審團；3年前屯門法院暫委裁判官陳碧橋審理反水貨客示威，判刑前也受到威嚇。藐視法庭行為愈來愈多，有損司法權威，對於惡意干擾和詆譭司法言行，法院應予重罰，遏阻歪風。不同政治光譜人士亦應以維護本港法治為念，勿以雙重標準看待藐視法庭行為。
Contempt of courtmust not be condoned
WHEN hearing a case of contempt of court concerning the occupation of
Mong Kok, the High Count found itself having to deal with an unexpected event
as Tang Linling, a woman from the mainland, snapped pictures inside the
courtroom. Tang has been jailed for seven days and ordered to pay nearly
$200,000 in punitive legal fees.
In the court case in question, a number of people were accused of
violating the court's injunction during the 2014 clearance of the Mong Kok
occupation. Last month the prosecution opened its case, during which Tang took
pictures and uploaded them to the Internet. Her phone contained at least three
such photographs, clearly showing the defendants and the counsels for both the
prosecution and the defence. In her defence, Tang claimed that she
"extremely respected" the court and the judge. She came to the court
to observe the proceedings with the sole intention of knowing more about Hong
Kong's legal system. She took the pictures only because she wanted to flaunt
her presence in a Hong Kong courtroom. However, Tang's actions were apparently
in violation of the rule that no photographs shall be taken in a Hong Kong
courtroom. Tang cited the differences between Hong Kong's legal system and that
of the mainland as her defence, claiming that her photo-taking was a
"trivial matter". However, institutions and practices vary from place
to place, and it is important to "do as the Romans do". Differences
between the two legal systems cannot be cited as the reason for paying no
regard to court rules in Hong Kong.
The case of contempt of court during the occupation of Mong Kok was not
heard with a jury, but some other cases heard by the High Court are. If
everyone paid no regard to court rules and took pictures at will, the jurors
would, inevitably, be worried that their identities would become known to the
public and they could be under heightened stress. This could influence the
ruling and undermine the rule of law in Hong Kong. For the first time in Hong
Kong, the court has handled a case of contempt of court involving photo-taking
in the High Court. As evidence is overwhelming, the court has had to make good
use of the case to send a clear message to society: the legal procedures are
not to be tampered with. Tang had it coming. Sentenced to seven days of
imprisonment and $200,000 in fines, she has paid dearly for her wrongdoings.
Recently, several incidents have happened involving the taking of
photographs in court. The most outrageous of such incidents happened last
month, when the court was hearing the riot cases in Mong Kok. When the jurors
were deliberating, the judge said that the judiciary had received an email with
a photograph of four jurors attached. The email was clearly aimed at
intimidating the jurors and challenging the authority of the judiciary. Given
the fact that at the beginning of the proceedings, someone claiming to be a
mainland visitor took pictures and sent them to others via WeChat, some people
associated the two incidents with each other. In all fairness, there is no
evidence at the moment that the photograph attached in the email was taken by
the mainlander — it could have been
someone else. Those on the outside do not understand the motives of the
picture-taker and the email-sender. It remains unknown whether they want the
defendant to be punished harshly or exonerated.
Given the increasing number of conducts of contempt of court, which is
undermining the authority of the judiciary, the courts should punish heavily
those offenders who maliciously interfere with court proceedings and denigrate
the judiciary both in words and in deeds. People across the political spectrum
should also care about the need to safeguard the rule of law in Hong Kong. They
should not apply a double standard when contempt of court is concerned.
香港法治須維護 藐視法庭不可長
高等法院審理佔領旺角藐視法庭案節外生枝，內地女子唐琳玲在法庭拍照，衍生另一宗藐視法庭案，最終唐被判囚7天，兼要支付近20萬元懲罰訟費。
2014年佔旺清場，多人涉嫌違反法庭禁制令。上月控方開案陳辭，唐琳玲在庭內拍攝並上傳照片，其手機內有最少3張照片，清晰拍攝到庭上答辯人、控辯雙方律師容貌。唐琳玲辯稱對法庭和法官「非常尊重」、「沒有任何藐視心態」，對事件表達悔意和道歉；法官陳慶偉亦相信，唐一心來旁聽，是想了解香港法律制度，拍照目的只為向內地朋友炫耀在香港法庭聽審，然而唐的行為，明顯違反法庭「不准拍攝」規定。唐琳玲以香港與內地法律差異作為自辯理由，形容拍照是「小事」，然而各處鄉村各處例，需要入鄉隨俗，兩地司法制度差異，並非毋須遵守本港法庭規則的理由。
雖然佔旺藐視法庭案，並非由陪審團處理，然而高院審訊不時會有陪審團，如果人人不理法庭規矩，隨便拍照，陪審員難免憂慮身分曝光，心理壓力大增，有可能影響裁決，損害本港法治。今次是本港首宗針對高院法庭拍照的藐視法庭案，證據充分，法庭有必要利用這次機會，向社會發出清晰信息，不容干擾司法程序。唐女自惹官非，換來7天牢獄和罰款20萬元，是一次代價高昂的教訓。
最近本港高院也發生多宗庭上拍照風波，最令人側目的是上月旺角暴動案，陪審團退庭商議期間，法官表示司法機構收到一封電郵，內附一幅攝有4名陪審員容貌的照片，電郵內容明顯有威嚇陪審團、挑戰司法機構權威之意。由於案件開審之初，曾有自稱內地遊客的人，在庭內拍照並以微信傳送相片，有人將兩件事扯在一起，惟平情而論，目前沒有證據，證明電郵照片就是該內地人所攝，拍照者也可以是其他人；外界也不清楚拍照者和發送電郵者的動機，究竟是想重判還是想讓被告脫罪。
沒有留言:
張貼留言