Our Azan Marwah, Vivienne Chen, and Kate Lau (with Nicklaus Pannu-Yuon) recently acted on behalf of four Defendants (D1-D4), who were jointly charged with “Obstructing a public officer in the performance of a public duty”, contrary to section 23 of the Summary Offences Ordinance (Cap 228).

The facts were that during the early morning hours at an outdoor sitting-out area, the Defendants were approached by police officers for an ID card check. The Defendants complied with this order by placing their ID cards on the table, and refused to hand the ID cards to the police officers directly. Subsequently, the Parties became emotional, foul language was exchanged, and the Defendants were arrested and charged.

The Defence raised various different challenges, including an application for the charge to be quashed pursuant to section 27 of the Magistrates Ordinance (Cap 227), and relied on the Court of Final Appeal’s decision in HKSAR v Tam Lap Fai (2005) 8 HKCFAR 216, maintaining that such actions constituted a mere inconvenience and invited a trifling additional effort rather than constituting a criminal obstruction of duty. It was therefore argued that the particulars of the charge were incapable of supporting a criminal conviction.

Having considered Tam Lap Fai and the whole circumstances of this case, the learned Magistrate held in favour of the Defence and accordingly acquitted all Defendants, along with an award of costs.

To explore more about our members, please visit here.

---

馬亞山大律師、惲浩翹大律師、陳樂庭大律師以及劉健賢大律師近日代表四名被告人(D1-D4)，他們共同被控以違反《簡易程序治罪條例》（第228章）第 23 條「阻礙公職人員執行職務」罪 。

案情指某日凌晨四名被告人在戶外休憩處聚集時，被警務人員要求出示身份證進行檢查 。四名被告人遵照要求出示身份證，惟四人將身分證放在桌面上，並拒絕將證件直接交予警務人員手中。其後雙方情緒激動、有人用粗言穢語互相指罵，四名被告人遂被捕及被檢控。

辯方提出多項不同的爭議，包括根據《裁判官條例》（第227章）第27條申請撤銷該控罪，並援引終審法院在香港特別行政區 訴 譚立輝 (2005) 8 HKCFAR 216一案的判決，主張如被告等人的行為僅為警務人員帶來輕微的「不便」，不足以構成「阻礙」。因此辯方指出，本案中行為以及控罪詳情並不足以構成刑事罪行。

裁判官在考慮譚立輝一案及本案整體案情後，裁定辯方得直，並同意辯方大律師陳詞四名被告人的行為對警務人員的影響僅屬輕微「不便」。控方未能於毫無合理疑點下證明控罪的所有元素。因此，裁判官判處所有被告罪名不成立，並判予辯方訟費。

欲了解更多關於我們的成員，請瀏覽此處。