民建聯查走光黑點 發放法院相涉違法
【明報專訊】民建聯婦女事務委員會第6年就本港走光黑點調查，昨日公布19個最新走光黑點，包括立法會3樓教育廊、屯門及粉嶺裁判法院及PMQ元創方等，譴責政府和有關發展商考慮並不周全。不過，民建聯調查中卻展示一些屯門及粉嶺裁判法院的內部照片，此舉涉嫌觸犯《簡易程序治罪條例》中禁止在法院拍照的罪行。
葛珮帆﹕如確定違法會致歉
負責此項調查的民建聯婦女事務委員會主席葛珮帆昨回應，指涉及裁判法院的數張相片由市民提供，該委員會正徵詢法律意見，如果調查中公布的相片確實觸犯法例，定必會向法院及公眾致歉。
在有關走光黑點的記者會上，葛珮帆與其他成員公布走光黑點，並將部分黑點的相片放大，在記者會上展示，包括粉嶺裁判法院內部的照片，指出走廊玻璃圍欄設計容易令女士走光。另發給傳媒的黑點相片檔案中，各有兩張屯門及粉嶺裁判法院的內部照片。根據《簡易程序治罪條例》，任何人在法院範圍內拍照或發放有關照片，即屬違法，可判處罰款250元。
元創方﹕已加措施防走光
在記者會公布的走光黑點，亦包括中環PMQ元創方的地下與地庫之間的玻璃天窗及樓梯的「走光陷阱」；但記者昨日到現場，見樓梯級間空隙已加上圍板，有天窗的地下展廊暫停開放。另有傳媒昨指出記者會中展示PMQ的照片，為有報章在4月底報道中的新聞照片，指民建聯在未經該傳媒機構允許下取用。PMQ回應指出，5月已完成優化工程，於天窗及樓梯加了分隔視線措施。
對於今次黑點調查問題多多，葛承認事件中有疏忽，承諾會檢討有關調查的考察制度。
(14/7/2014)
我只評論這新聞有關法院範圍拍照的合法性問題。先看法例第228章《簡易程序治罪條例》第7條：
(1) 任何人有以下行為，可處罰款$250─
明報這篇報導涉及兩個問題，第一個是我講過很多次的罰款分級制，250元的罰款屬第一級，所以變成2000元，此其一。第二個問題是究竟是否所有法庭拍攝都屬違法？我認為未必。從上面條文可以看出，在法庭內及進行研訊的任何地方或其範圍內拍攝或繪畫，都屬違法，真正的著眼點是保障法庭的莊嚴，法官、證人及陪審員等。如果在法庭沒有運作下，空無一人的情況下拍攝，犯法嗎？這是富爭論性的。如果翻閱司法機構的年報及瀏覽其網頁，都可以看到拍攝法庭內的照片，包括模擬法庭及對到訪者講解的照片，那麼司法機構負責拍攝的人都犯法嗎？我想指出法律的釋義不是死板的，故此，如果拍攝法庭照片展示走光黑點，是否犯法，視乎在甚麽情況下拍攝。當然，胡亂拍攝，更可能觸犯普通法的藐視法庭罪。
2011年9月，發生在英國這段新聞值得喜歡用電話拍攝的人引以為戒，BBC當年這樣報導：
Teenager jailed for taking photo at Luton Crown Court
A teenager from Luton has been jailed for two months for taking a photograph of a courtroom from the public gallery during a hearing.
Paul Thompson, 19, had gone to Luton Crown Court to support a friend facing a custodial sentence for robbing an off-duty police officer.
He was seen taking a picture which he sent to a friend.
After his Blackberry phone was seized he admitted being in contempt of court and was jailed by Judge Barbara Mensah.
She said: "There are notices all around the court building about not taking photographs in court.
"This is a serious offence and the message must go out that people cannot take photos."
As she jailed him on Friday, Thompson said: "That's stupid, man."
After Thompson was seen taking the photo his phone was seized and he was taken to the cells.
'Stupid idiot'
An hour later he was brought into the dock and admitted the charge.
Thompson's defence barrister John Livingstone told the judge the teenager had admitted being "a stupid idiot".
He said: "It was not a photograph of anyone in particular and he did not notice any signs forbidding this behaviour.
"This has been a very big shock for him."
He said Thompson was very concerned as he had left his eight-week-old puppy alone in his flat in Luton, and the dog was not house trained and no-one else had access to the property.
A spokesman for the UK penal reform charity, the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: "Short spells in custody have been shown to be very ineffectual and they are a costly way of dealing with the issue.
"Young people are so used to using their phones like this these days and a little understanding of that by the court would not have resulted in a prison sentence.
"Also, and this was seen with the disproportionate sentencing following the riots, there is a degree to which it appears the justice system is not keeping pace with the change in technology.
【明報專訊】民建聯婦女事務委員會第6年就本港走光黑點調查，昨日公布19個最新走光黑點，包括立法會3樓教育廊、屯門及粉嶺裁判法院及PMQ元創方等，譴責政府和有關發展商考慮並不周全。不過，民建聯調查中卻展示一些屯門及粉嶺裁判法院的內部照片，此舉涉嫌觸犯《簡易程序治罪條例》中禁止在法院拍照的罪行。
葛珮帆﹕如確定違法會致歉
負責此項調查的民建聯婦女事務委員會主席葛珮帆昨回應，指涉及裁判法院的數張相片由市民提供，該委員會正徵詢法律意見，如果調查中公布的相片確實觸犯法例，定必會向法院及公眾致歉。
在有關走光黑點的記者會上，葛珮帆與其他成員公布走光黑點，並將部分黑點的相片放大，在記者會上展示，包括粉嶺裁判法院內部的照片，指出走廊玻璃圍欄設計容易令女士走光。另發給傳媒的黑點相片檔案中，各有兩張屯門及粉嶺裁判法院的內部照片。根據《簡易程序治罪條例》，任何人在法院範圍內拍照或發放有關照片，即屬違法，可判處罰款250元。
元創方﹕已加措施防走光
在記者會公布的走光黑點，亦包括中環PMQ元創方的地下與地庫之間的玻璃天窗及樓梯的「走光陷阱」；但記者昨日到現場，見樓梯級間空隙已加上圍板，有天窗的地下展廊暫停開放。另有傳媒昨指出記者會中展示PMQ的照片，為有報章在4月底報道中的新聞照片，指民建聯在未經該傳媒機構允許下取用。PMQ回應指出，5月已完成優化工程，於天窗及樓梯加了分隔視線措施。
對於今次黑點調查問題多多，葛承認事件中有疏忽，承諾會檢討有關調查的考察制度。
(14/7/2014)
我只評論這新聞有關法院範圍拍照的合法性問題。先看法例第228章《簡易程序治罪條例》第7條：
| 章： | 228 | 標題： | 《簡易程序治罪條例》 | 憲報編號： | L.N. 247 of 2000 |
| 條： | 7 | 條文標題： | 禁止在法庭內攝影等 | 版本日期： | 01/09/2000 |
- (a) 在法庭內拍攝或企圖拍攝任何照片，或為供發表之用而在法庭內繪畫或企圖繪畫該法庭的法官，或在該法庭所進行的民事或刑事法律程序中的陪審員、證人或任何一方的肖像或素描；或 (由1979年第7號法律公告修訂)
(b) 發表在違反本條上述條文的情況下所拍攝的任何照片、所繪畫的任何肖像或素描，或其任何複印品。
- (a) “法庭”(court) 一詞指任何法庭，包括裁判官進行研訊的任何地方；
(b) “法官”(judge) 一詞包括司法常務官及裁判官； (由1997年第47號第10條修訂；由2000年第28號第47條修訂)
(c) 任何照片、肖像或素描，如果是在法庭或舉行聆訊的建築物或其範圍內拍攝或繪畫的，或是拍攝或繪畫某人並且是在該人進入或離開該法庭或上述建築物或其範圍時拍攝或繪畫的，則該照片、肖像或素描，須當作是在法庭內拍攝或繪畫。
明報這篇報導涉及兩個問題，第一個是我講過很多次的罰款分級制，250元的罰款屬第一級，所以變成2000元，此其一。第二個問題是究竟是否所有法庭拍攝都屬違法？我認為未必。從上面條文可以看出，在法庭內及進行研訊的任何地方或其範圍內拍攝或繪畫，都屬違法，真正的著眼點是保障法庭的莊嚴，法官、證人及陪審員等。如果在法庭沒有運作下，空無一人的情況下拍攝，犯法嗎？這是富爭論性的。如果翻閱司法機構的年報及瀏覽其網頁，都可以看到拍攝法庭內的照片，包括模擬法庭及對到訪者講解的照片，那麼司法機構負責拍攝的人都犯法嗎？我想指出法律的釋義不是死板的，故此，如果拍攝法庭照片展示走光黑點，是否犯法，視乎在甚麽情況下拍攝。當然，胡亂拍攝，更可能觸犯普通法的藐視法庭罪。
2011年9月，發生在英國這段新聞值得喜歡用電話拍攝的人引以為戒，BBC當年這樣報導：
Teenager jailed for taking photo at Luton Crown Court
A teenager from Luton has been jailed for two months for taking a photograph of a courtroom from the public gallery during a hearing.
Paul Thompson, 19, had gone to Luton Crown Court to support a friend facing a custodial sentence for robbing an off-duty police officer.
He was seen taking a picture which he sent to a friend.
After his Blackberry phone was seized he admitted being in contempt of court and was jailed by Judge Barbara Mensah.
She said: "There are notices all around the court building about not taking photographs in court.
"This is a serious offence and the message must go out that people cannot take photos."
As she jailed him on Friday, Thompson said: "That's stupid, man."
After Thompson was seen taking the photo his phone was seized and he was taken to the cells.
'Stupid idiot'
An hour later he was brought into the dock and admitted the charge.
Thompson's defence barrister John Livingstone told the judge the teenager had admitted being "a stupid idiot".
He said: "It was not a photograph of anyone in particular and he did not notice any signs forbidding this behaviour.
"This has been a very big shock for him."
He said Thompson was very concerned as he had left his eight-week-old puppy alone in his flat in Luton, and the dog was not house trained and no-one else had access to the property.
A spokesman for the UK penal reform charity, the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: "Short spells in custody have been shown to be very ineffectual and they are a costly way of dealing with the issue.
"Young people are so used to using their phones like this these days and a little understanding of that by the court would not have resulted in a prison sentence.
"Also, and this was seen with the disproportionate sentencing following the riots, there is a degree to which it appears the justice system is not keeping pace with the change in technology.
記得1997回歸前, 一眾法庭職員都在庭內拍照留念, 因為那個彩色招牌將會被拆走.
回覆刪除曾經聽過同事說, 有一名市民在審訊時在觀眾席拍照, 她的目標是拍法官. 她當庭斷正, 法官盤問她, 天曉得她回答說 : "發官大人, 你好靚仔, 所以我影你.“
聽說法官只叫她不要再拍， 沒有追究.
也聽說那位法官真的很靚仔.
她那種拍攝就正是法律針對的，法官不追究算她走運。
刪除如果要跟足，傳媒差不多天天都犯法，因為「該人進入或離開該法庭或上述建築物或其範圍時拍攝或繪畫的...當作是在法庭內拍攝」，但傳媒最喜歡在法院門口擺下攝影機陣，影那些名人進出法院。
回覆刪除建築物或其範圍的介定比較含糊。
刪除"... in the court-room or in the building or in the precincts of the building in which the court is held ..."
刪除我覺得字面意思絕不含糊喎，同意 Star Chamber，「影那些名人進出法院」，嚴格來說已犯法。
舉東區為例，上面有郵遞中心，民政事務總處等，法庭範圍的分界綫在那裏？大樓門口外還是precincts嗎？這是我所指的含糊。
刪除標少, 如果她在東區拍你, 拍完之後她對你解釋說 "法官大人, 你好靚仔, 所以我影你", 你會追究嗎?
回覆刪除假如她拍的是我, 假如環境許可, 我會選擇不追究, 然後在心裡面笑.
蛋散，你好易畀女人呃啫。好多年前有一次，我排隊買飛睇戲，一男一女喺我後面，女嗰果企得好貼我，直情感覺到呼吸 。我只好向前行一步，點知佢又向前貼近，你估我即時反應係乜？立即摸吓個錢包喺唔喺度。
刪除你自己靚仔，唔使等人confirm，最緊要信塊鏡，你唔靚仔唔會畀人讚到樣都變埋。
追唔追究，是要考慮被名干犯的性質，不在乎讃你還罵你。
作為一個law student, 我不時都在facebook見到師兄師姐admit當天穿著律師袍拿著花與家人親友在高院建築物內合照的相片, 連"不准拍攝"的牌也攝入鏡頭, 我見到這些相一直都得懷疑technically有沒有犯法.
回覆刪除我覺得立法的目的並非絕對不准拍攝，所以才寫這篇。
刪除上次参與admission 程序時，在尾段，法官特地宣布准許拍照。
刪除認許程序當天，在該法庭外的樓層內是可以拍照的，但僅限於當天，一般法庭職員會在認許當天的樓層擺上當天特許拍照的牌子，不過法庭內依舊是不許拍照的。
刪除標標, 我要運用特權下令你寫文分析以下一段文字:
回覆刪除「執業大律師陸偉雄接受本網訪問時指，若市民自發前往中環四處走動，警方不諳其目的，不能貿然作出拘捕行動；但一旦市民駐足過久，有實質證據（如錄影或長期觀察）顯示市民不是僅僅路過或圍觀，是在參與行動，則會有被捕風險。」
thehousenews.com/occupy-central/%E7%B6%B2%E6%B0%91%E7%99%BC%E8%B5%B7-%E6%B5%81%E5%8B%95%E4%BD%94%E4%B8%AD-%E8%81%B2%E6%8F%B4-%E5%92%8C%E5%B9%B3%E4%BD%94%E4%B8%AD/
遵命囉，不過要打完波先。
刪除標少, 嘩，該名女子真夠狼, 想抽你水一樣, 她令我想起非禮，還有吹耳仔。
回覆刪除相比之下，我真的比較容易被女人呃。