法官與刁民As If The Judge Was Not There Again

	CHOY BING WING	Plaintiff
	and
	BUILDING AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION, CHINA	1st Defendant
	DIRECTOR OF CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION, CHINA	2nd Defendant
	COMMISSIONER OF INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION, CHINA	3rd Defendant

____________________

Before: Deputy High Court Judge Au-Yeung in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 15 November 2011

Date of Decision: 15 November 2011

____________________

D E C I S I O N

____________________

1. This is Mr Choy’s application for leave to appeal against my decision dated 4 October 2011.

2. Mr Choy appeared this morning and asked me whether I had answered his letter dated 7 November 2011. In substance, the background of this matter was a request for transcripts. As will be revealed in the reasons for dismissing the leave application below, I had in fact answered Mr Choy’s previous request for transcripts, but I had not answered his letter dated 7 November 2011 because I considered that letter as abusive in nature.

3. Without hearing further from me, Mr Choy walked out of court at about 10:09 am and did not pursue his application for leave to appeal.

4. In the premises, that application ought to be dismissed outright. However, to put the record absolutely straight, I would deal briefly with that leave application. (extracts from HCA2458/2007)

上面是昨天上載的判辭的一段，看了相信你丈八金剛摸不著頭腦。申請人蔡炳榮幾乎無法官不識，不單只是法院常客，辱罵法官也習以為常，結果因藐視法庭而入獄也不只一次。從判辭可見，他質問法官之後，便拍拍屁股離開法庭，視法官如無物。不要講是法庭，就算走入銀行問點事情，也應該具備待人接物的基本禮貌，不可能掉頭就走。上一次他藐視法庭被判監，正正是辱罵這件案的主審法官歐陽桂如。怎樣為之辱罵呢？讓我舉一些從HCMP1313/2010的判辭找到，處理他藐視法庭案中的例子讓大家感受下。

Re: Payment of Blackmail aided and abetted by Bitch Queenie (sic) Au-yeung for the cover-ups of crimes committed”.

“Bitch Queenie (sic) Au-yeung (Registrar of High Court) stopped documents which slandered me made known to me by my Most Honourable Friends on Government Service, her attempt to the further crime cover-ups”.

“… I pay the blackmail of judicial cheatings committed by Criminal/ Bitch Au Yeung, Registrar of HKSAR”.

“I demand Mr Tsang to clear the complaints and the treatment of payment of ransom of the blackmail conspired together with Bitch Queenie (sic) Au-yeung”.

究竟他是精神出問題抑或膽大包天，並非我能判斷的，據報他大學畢業，今年65歲。在早幾年的另一件案，他罵上訴庭副庭長羅傑志(Rogers)是騙子。把法官罵成男盜女娼，無出其右。從HCMP4694/2003，舉一兩個例子給你看：

“We have applied for Rogers VP to be removed from this court in a notice of motion submitted on 22 April 2003, because we consider that you are a crook, a serious crook.”

“My Lord – my Rogers, not my Lord – you are not quite entitled to be called a Lord. It’s okay that cheating was had been … was made by you. If a judge made cheating it’s okay if they got authority and you just throw it away in the rubbish bin and make decision and play dirty trick with Winston Poon in court and order … and struck out the petition of Mr Ng Yat-chi on behalf of me. That is very dirty and filthy of you.”


我講這一大堆話，想提出的是，法庭為甚麼會對這些浪費時間，無理肆意批評的人寬宏大量。每件案的判辭都十分認真的寫，嚴肅認真對待那些荒謬申請，豈非變成姑息養奸，這是九七後才看到的現象。縱容這些人，無疑鼓勵仿效者，也妨礙了其他人更快捷獲得裁決的機會。更甚者是由於上級法院法官「開明」，下級法院法官給人罵狗官也不吭聲。10多年前一次判刑會議(sentencing conference)，某法官(現貴為上訴庭副庭長)訓斥一眾裁判官，不要動輒就對講粗口的被告，以藐視法庭懲處。大法官認為，一些學歷低，出身草根的被告，粗口就由他講吧，不要計較。說溜了嘴的粗口，不作計較還可以，以粗口罵法官又如何呢？標少不寫副庭長的名字，以免看了這blog的人，到大人席前放肆而歸究於我。裁判官給人罵粗，一般運用裁判官條例第99條作簡易懲處，有人罰錢，有的加監。有一次(20多年前)，被告罵當時是裁判官的Gerard Muttrie "f" your mother. Muttrie看他一眼然後說:Go ahead, defendant. My mother is 80. 老外法官可以採取這種開放態度，華人法官卻不能嚥下這口氣。法官沒有驚堂木，也沒有殺威棒，時代變了，但也總不能受人肆意辱罵，無禮對待。這不是個人榮辱的問題，彰顯法治的地方，尊嚴受挫，法治精神也蕩然無存。