既然抬走市民那位人士當時並無表露身份,咁已經係不合法攻擊,市民係咪有權保護自身安全作出反抗?最後又會否被控告打差人呢?又點解既然佢地認為自己係合法有理據抬走可能示威人士,為何不表路身份?其實件事好黑暗、但亦只需要用一般理解就可以明白及顯示到,香港的警員我相信佢地都知這做法係無乜法理依據,但上頭下令又不能不從!心冷了,心冷在於香港已經續步被不合理的人和事操控,香港的紀律部隊前線人員亦被迫埋沒幾十年來一直遵守的行動指引,我以前都認為Hong Kong is Dying呢句有點唯恐天下不亂,但現在的磪向著呢個方向走!
@strickerrei
11 жыл бұрын
19;06 主持好波!
@zherubshedu4833
12 жыл бұрын
張志剛有關部分球迷列入「黑名單」,這個說法也是錯誤及沒有根據的 (詳情請參閱附註),被禁制 (banning order) 的球迷,不是那些預估會搞事的球迷,而是因為這些球迷有前科,曾被被定罪的足球流氓 (convicted as Football hooliganism)。所以在『外國』不是有個所謂的『黑名單』,禁制一些沒有因犯法而定罪的公民參予足球賽事,或集會的自由,而只是限制曾被定罪的人,而限制令也是有時限的。學民思潮的學生,從未因非法示威被定罪,那又何來有理由要把他們驅逐離場呢?至少直到學生們作出所謂的『非法示威』行為前,警方沒有這樣的權力或責任去驅逐他們離場。 用個簡單的例子,就好比交通條例,當駕駛者因超速扣滿分後,法庭裁定停牌 (banning for driving) 一段時間,這不是一個預估會犯事的黑名單,而是犯了超速法例的人的名單,(明唔明呀張志剛?) 在沒有犯任何交通規則前,法治社會警察不能在你未超速前,因為擔心你會超速,而任意在公路上截停逮捕你,把你趕離公路。
page 1 -- we are saying china student(many S) taking exam with 1 standard CD -- then go for CHINA PUBLIC examination! by the way, we should know our CE and LEGCO members their public exam result e.g. Lee siu PO(know as simon lee-- financial tv show) high school friendship classmate 李兆波 ,he never took Advance level exam, he talk christianity on nonstock on tv finance programme on economic, he get into fast-way of CU deg because there is a short-cut way for CU to take bright brilliant HKCEE 3Aor4
@kc3366
11 жыл бұрын
In Yeung May-wan and Others v. HKSAR.[42] The Court held that, in order to be compatible with Article 28 of the Basic Law, the suspicion of guilt must be objectively reasonable, and the facts known by the police officer. On the facts of that case, it was held that the arrests were not lawful and constituted false imprisonment as the police officers did not have in mind the element of "without lawful excuse" when arresting the protestors for obstruction of public place.
Пікірлер: 307