What's new

China Hong Kong SAR: News and Images

i guess by the crime stated, Joshua must clean charity area for 3 days.
 
Well it's hard to prove a judge is doing wrong or under influence from outsiders because a judgement is very subjective.

There are some cases in HK where judges have overturned a lower court ruling for a retrial because there is a system for appeal in HK
Hong Kong Court Orders Retrial of Nancy Kissel Murder Case
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704140104575058092228681452

So if the defendent or plaintiff is not happy with the judge's sentences, they have rights to appeal

However in very broad terms, yes, because judges are human beings afterall particularly when they're confronting with cases which call for value judgements
I think judges all over the world are unavoidably influenced by their political preferences, social pressure, peer group pressure and the culture that they are brought up with But if the values are framed within a legal context and written into legal statutes, then their judgements have to be exercised within the boundary set by the law or precedent cases
Some courts in HK do not require jury services. They are usually lower courts such as Labour Tribunal, Small Claims Tribunal, Lands Tribunal ...etc where a jury is not required. If jurors are required their ultimate duty is to deliver the verdict: "Guilty or Not Guilty " after that the judge has rooms to play around during sentencing like the length of jail-time or community services, amount of penalties, fees or damages
 
Last edited:
There are some cases in HK where judges have overturned a lower court ruling for a retrial because there is a system for appeal in HK
Hong Kong Court Orders Retrial of Nancy Kissel Murder Case
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704140104575058092228681452

So if the defendent or plaintiff is not happy with the judge's sentences, they have rights to appeal

However in very broad terms, yes, because judges are human beings afterall particularly when they're confronting with cases which call for value judgements
I think judges all over the world are unavoidably influenced by their political preferences, social pressure, peer group pressure and the culture that they are brought up with But if the values are framed within a legal context and written into legal statutes, then their judgements have to be exercised within the boundary set by the law or precedent cases
Some courts in HK do not require jury services. They are usually lower courts such as Labour Tribunal, Small Claims Tribunal, Lands Tribunal ...etc where a jury is not required. If jurors are required their ultimate duty is to deliver the verdict: "Guilty or Not Guilty " after that the judge has rooms to play around during sentencing like the length of jail-time or community services, amount of penalties, fees or damages

Not sure why they don't sentence based on a set guidelines
 
Not sure why they don't sentence based on a set guidelines

There are sets of guidelines as I 've said above like the promulgation of "sentencing guidelines"
https://hub.hku.hk/bitstream/10722/219342/1/Content.pdf
Abstract
"Constitutional norms, statutory rules and common law principles govern the art and science
of sentencing in Hong Kong. Death penalty and corporal punishments are sentencing
measures of the past. As reflected in a 2014 law reform report on suspended sentences, the
emphasis now is on discretionary sentencing, although murder still carries a mandatory life
imprisonment. Hong Kong courts have a full range of sentencing options to ensure that the
punishment fits the crime and offender. Sentencing decisions are informed by traditional
purposes of punishment including public protection, deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation and
reparation for victims. The purpose of denunciation has been cited by judges more frequently
in recent years. Restorative justice, however, is not commonly referred to. Hong Kong’s
Court of Appeal provides guideline sentences for specific offences; such guidelines assist
courts in setting the starting point sentence in a particular case.
Aggravating and mitigating
factors serve respectively to move the sentence marker up and down. While proportionality
is an applied constitutional principle of sentencing, courts still enhance sentences in cases of
prevalent organised crime and routinely give sentencing discounts on pleas of guilty or for
assistance given to the authorities.
 
Last edited:
There are set of guidelines as I 've said above like the promulgation of "sentencing guidelines"
https://hub.hku.hk/bitstream/10722/219342/1/Content.pdf
Abstract
"Constitutional norms, statutory rules and common law principles govern the art and science
of sentencing in Hong Kong. Death penalty and corporal punishments are sentencing
measures of the past. As reflected in a 2014 law reform report on suspended sentences, the
emphasis now is on discretionary sentencing, although murder still carries a mandatory life
imprisonment. Hong Kong courts have a full range of sentencing options to ensure that the
punishment fits the crime and offender. Sentencing decisions are informed by traditional
purposes of punishment including public protection, deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation and
reparation for victims. The purpose of denunciation has been cited by judges more frequently
in recent years. Restorative justice, however, is not commonly referred to. Hong Kong’s
Court of Appeal provides guideline sentences for specific offences; such guidelines assist
courts in setting the starting point sentence in a particular case.
Aggravating and mitigating
factors serve respectively to move the sentence marker up and down. While proportionality
is an applied constitutional principle of sentencing, courts still enhance sentences in cases of
prevalent organised crime and routinely give sentencing discounts on pleas of guilty or for
assistance given to the authorities.

I guess I should be more specific. In Canadian laws, we have sentencing guidelines:

Eg. 1st degree murder (planned murder)- 25 years in prison
2nd degree murder-up to 15 years
manslaughter (ie. accidently killed someone while driving under influence) - 7-10 years.

A sentence can also be compounded based on other crimes committed during the process. Eg. You kidnapped a kid for ransom (crime). You killed him intentionally or accidentally (crime). You also assaulted 3 people in the process (crime). So sentencing would be times 3.
In our code, if you kill or assault a police officer, the sentence is harsher .
 
I guess I should be more specific. In Canadian laws, we have sentencing guidelines:

Eg. 1st degree murder (planned murder)- 25 years in prison
2nd degree murder-up to 15 years
manslaughter (ie. accidently killed someone while driving under influence) - 7-10 years.

A sentence can also be compounded based on other crimes committed during the process. Eg. You kidnapped a kid for ransom (crime). You killed him intentionally or accidentally (crime). You also assaulted 3 people in the process (crime). So sentencing would be times 3.
In our code, if you kill or assault a police officer, the sentence is harsher .

The principles are the same in Common Law system that is being practised in the present/former "commonwealth"
countries/districts. HK is one of those as mentioned in my comments @39
 
Can Hong Kong break free of China?



Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry

REUTERS/Tyrone Siu

Hong Kong is a historical accident. China had to give up what was then a mostly empty island to Britain after losing the First Opium War in 1842. The tiny island grew to become one of the world's most thriving metropolises as the U.K. established a benevolently deregulated economy that enabled exiles from Communist China to build one of the world's most bustling business centers. Hong Kong became an economic powerhouse; today it has a population of more than 7 million and the world's 10th highest GDP per capita (on a purchasing power parity basis). But it has also been a cultural beacon, hosting thriving religious organizations that couldn't prosper in China, and producing an iconic and influential movie industry.

When the U.K. handed over Hong Kong to China in 1997, pursuant to the original lease from the 19th century, China promised to respect Hong Kong's historical liberties under the "One Country, Two Systems" concept. The idea was that Hong Kong would become a part of China, but have its own constitution and its own political system, including civil liberties.

Anyone who trusted that promise was smoking something.

And indeed, China has recently been cracking down. In 2014, a decision by the Chinese Communist Party to start vetting candidates for elections prompted the "umbrella movement," a series of sit-ins and protests that froze the city for months. More recently, Chinese dissidents living in Hong Kong, who used to be able to rely on safety, have been running into "accidents" — or disappearing. Most famously, Lam Wing-kee, a seller of books critical of China, disappeared, and was only allowed to return to Hong Kong after months of detention and alleged torture.

The latest crackdown from the Chinese government has caused a severe backlash from the umbrella movement. And it's causing a major shift. Hong Kong reformers have always agitated only for maintaining Hong Kong's liberties within China. Now, a growing number of voices are advocating what should have been the goal all along: Hong Kong independence.



The South China Morning Post frets that teachers in Hong Kong might advocate independence to their students, and the government says that teachers who advocate independence will be sacked, a sure sign of fear. The Chinese government is also warning that candidates for the Legislative Council, Hong Kong's semi-elected parliament, who support independence will face "follow-up action".

This is a really big deal. Barely a year or two ago, the Hong Kong independence movement was a joke. Literally. People made a joke flag and a joke website for the Hong Kong independence movement.

Now the independence movement is real. It's fielding candidates for office, and has a secret membership list. Today, people are marching with Hong Kong's colonial-era flag, and the "dragon and lion flag," which displays Hong Kong's colonial-era arms, symbols for a return to independence.

The movement is still fringe, and there hasn't been serious polling on it. But the demographics of the Hong Kong pro-democracy movement are changing. Younger citizens feel that the traditional pro-democracy parties have accomplished nothing, and younger activists don't want to work through the process anymore. They want to protest, sit-in, perform street action, and get arrested. A recent poll found the number of Hong Kong residents who say they "feel Chinese" has dropped to a record low.

The pro-independence movement has a very difficult road ahead of it. To say China is irredentist is to put it mildly. It still hasn't gotten over Taiwan's independence decades ago, still claims Taiwan as a part of China, and breaks off diplomatic relationships with any country that recognizes Taiwan. Hong Kong cannot win independence militarily, and for it to win independence through peaceful means would mean a willingness on the part of China to refuse a crackdown for political or PR reasons that it has never, ever shown. Xi Jinping's government, far from embracing a putative trend toward a political opening in China following the economic opening, has concentrated power and embraced authoritarianism to an extent unseen since at least Tian An Men. A Chinese prosecutor's office darkly warned that Hong Kong independence would turn the peninsula "into Syria".

And yet... China is an unstable country. And in a world of Brexit and Trump for president, anything is possible. Black swans can and do happen.

More broadly, the Hong Kong independence movement shows that this beautiful city has spine and spunk. It is right. City-states are the future. And Hong Kong is more Hong Kong than China at this point. It has its own history, its own culture, its own people, its own problems. Long live Hong Kong independence.
 
I believe the hate resulted from the rejection of residence of Filipino maids in HK is real, the OP proved my point well

M05jKZz.jpg


Hong Kong's highest court on Monday rejected the final appeal of two Filipino workers to gain permanent residency in Hong Kong
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/25/world/asia/hong-kong-maids/
 
Hong Kong's highest court on Monday rejected the final appeal of two Filipino workers to gain permanent residency in Hong Kong
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/25/world/asia/hong-kong-maids/

The Filipino maids we have in Hong Kong are good people, they are working hard to support their families back home. I have nothing but good things to say about them, from my personal experience with many of them.

That said, why should they get Chinese citizenship or HK residency? China is not an immigration nation, they have their own country in the Philippines. Did they really expect to get it?
 
I believe the hate resulted from the rejection of residence of Filipino maids in HK is real, the OP proved my point well

M05jKZz.jpg


Hong Kong's highest court on Monday rejected the final appeal of two Filipino workers to gain permanent residency in Hong Kong
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/25/world/asia/hong-kong-maids/

it's the right decision. in HK the people only want the best and brightest minds. Maids provide a service, but it's not a high skilled job. plus there's indonesian maids now
 

Back
Top Bottom