明報專訊】32歲內地女子前年申請「高才通」，訛稱持澳洲蒙納許大學（Monash University）學士學位，被控一項為取得入境證而作出虛假陳述罪。案件昨日在沙田裁判法院再提堂，控方稱索取法律意見及與辯方商討後，同意以簽保守行為方式處理。在被告表示同意案情下，署理主任裁判官鄭紀航批准她以2000元自簽、守行為24個月，控罪撤銷。
......
我對假學歷申請高才通獲自簽守行為的處理方法頗有不滿。一般所謂自簽守行不留案底是甚麼呢? 自從《罪犯自新條例》在1986年通過後, 法官已沒有權對定了罪的被告不留案底。犯了法的人除非抗辯後脫罪, 想不留下刑事紀錄, 只有控辯雙方商討下, 控方撤銷控罪, 被告同意案情及同意簽保守行為, 而法官也認為這處理方法恰當才行。行內人稱之為 O.N.E. bind over, O.N.E.即是offer no evidence。
甚麼控罪才可O.N.E. bind over呢? 我只能講一般原則, 若你阿爸是李剛則套用別的原則, 我像說笑嗎? 你繼續看下去就知。一般原則是被告初犯, 控罪涉及輕微暴力, 被告同意案情及同意簽保守行為。以往(即90年以前), 最常見獲簽保守行為的控罪是普通襲擊、公眾地方打架和刑事毀壞, 所涉行為都是一時衝動及沒有使用武器的。我舉一例, 梁天琦在未開審旺角暴動案時, 因大公報記者跟踪他, 最終兩人在太古地鐵站扭打在一起而被拘捕, 當年是以自簽守行為處理的。那是典型恰當的處理方法。但「我爸是李剛」之類的權貴思維擴闊了獲O.N.E. bind over的罪行類型, 本博以前寫過, 不想贅述, 因為一個是高院法官的女兒, 另一個是高院法官的兒子, 所以連店鋪盜竊及藏毒, 也獲O.N.E. bind over了。
現因人事更替, 律政司刑事檢控科比以前更寬鬆, 所以連賣翻版手袋波鞋也獲O.N.E. bind over, 我對此沒有批評, 畢竟他們所賣的只是一個手袋一對波鞋, 價值也不高。像店鋪盜竊, 所涉貨價大都在幾百元之內, 也不是預謀那種。可是, 假學歷一定是premeditated的, 通過涉及造假產業鍊的一門生意, 得手之後會涉及一連串持續的罪行, 用假學歷騙學位騙職位騙財(obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception), 而且近年這類事件發生猖獗, 多過盜竊和非禮, 盜竊可以是一時的貪念, 所以O.N.E. bind over, 非禮是一時色心起, 但從不會O.N.E. bind over, 判監居多。不要在網上找個別例子來反駁我, 我以前也寫過一例, 原因你不夠我清楚。為甚麼這種使香港蒙羞的假學歷案可以O.N.E. bind over來處理, 裁判官又怎會允許這樣做? 如果是證據不足, 我寧願被告脫罪, 在不要勞什子的bind over。
我等待鄒幸彤案O.N.E. bind over呢!
Waiting for Godot
朱奉慈大律師俾大律師公會裁定違反專業操守停牌半年!
回覆刪除South China Morning Post, 12 Feb 2000 (Cliff Buddle)
http://www.scmp.com/article/307891/barrister-barred-deceiving-university
Lawyer Counsel Barrister George Chu Barred for Deceiving University
Lawyer Counsel Barrister George Chu (朱奉慈大律師) has been suspended for six months after a disciplinary tribunal found he pretended to have a first class honours degree when applying for a scholarship at the University of Hong Kong.
George Chu Fung-chee, admitted to the Bar in 1994, also breached a promise to the university not to operate as a barrister once he became a post-graduate student, the Barristers' Disciplinary Tribunal found.
The suspension was the longest to be imposed since 1996, and the tribunal took the unusual step of ordering that its findings be sent to the Secretary for Justice, Director of Legal Aid, the Law Society and all barristers.
Bar Association chairman Ronny Tong Ka-wah SC, said it had recently started requesting the tribunal to order publication of this kind in appropriate cases.
'There is an educational element in the decisions themselves,' he said.
'There is also a need for an increase in transparency in the profession. Those of us who have unfortunately committed disciplinary offences should be made known to the public.' Referring to Mr Chu's suspension, Mr Tong said: 'This is a serious case. In these circumstances it is only right that it be made known.' Bar Association honorary secretary Ambrose Ho said further changes which would make disciplinary decisions more transparent were being considered, but they might require amending current laws.
'We hope that by publishing the details of a conviction it might help our own members in complying with our regulations,' he said.
Mr Chu, whose suspension began on February 1 2000, was found guilty in relation to five complaints of professional misconduct.
He was convicted of falsely stating that his degree in economics and political science, awarded by the University of Waterloo, in Canada, was a first class honours degree.
The misrepresentation was used to support an application for admission to the university in March 1997, for post-graduate studentship in early September 1997, and for a scholarship at the end of that month.
He was also found to have worked as a barrister in September and October 1997, despite promising the university he would not, and signing an eligibility document stating he was not engaged in paid employment.
Mr Chu has the right to appeal against the tribunal's decision in the Court of Appeal.
He could not be contacted for comment.
我估呢個同中西方嘅文化有啲關係，你提到八九十年代一般自簽守行為都係適用被告初犯，控罪牽涉到輕微暴力，先會獲得簽保守行為！當時香港仍然為英國殖民地，法院法官，裁判官等唔少仍然係老外，佢哋都係用西方嘅思維方式，對於一時衝動嘅輕微暴力，容忍度係比較高，同我喺加拿大美國所見一樣，打拳頭交好多警察都唔係好理，就算返到差館（尤其啲小鎮，可能警告了事，但對於一啲不誠實嘅行為，容忍到就比較低！相反，華人（特別係國內）對於唔誠實嘅行為，只係看成貪小便宜，覺得冇乜大不了，容忍到比較高，反而覺得暴力（可能只係輕微暴力）都唔容忍！咁而家香港已經回歸大陸，新嘅一批律師，裁判官可能都未必一定係香港仔，就算係可能阿爸阿媽都係新香港人！文化背景傾向中國大陸嗰套，呢啲咁嘅轉變好難避免，會越來越多喺各種範疇出現！
回覆刪除