Justice must be seen to be done

OVER the past nine years, Amina MariamBokhary, whose uncle is Kemal Bokhary, a Permanent Judge of the Court of Final Appeal, has thrice been charged with assaulting apolice officer. In all the three cases she pleaded guiltyor was convicted, but she was invariably given light sentences. She has thrice avoided being jailed. Suchcases are very rare indeed.

Celebrities and their relatives who fall foul of thelaw have inherent advantages. They have the moneyto retain barristers or senior counsel, who would racktheir brains to defend them. They can have their healthreports prepared by medical authorities, and they mayask other celebrities to give character evidence orprovide affidavits for use in mitigation.

Amina has such advantages. Her uncle KemalBokhary is a Permanent Judge of the CFA, and heraunt Verina Saeeda Bokhary, a High Court judge. Istheir illustrious status in the judiciary her anotheradvantage? Has that had anything to do with her trial?It is on this point that the controversy her sentence hasaroused centres. That is what many people want tofind out.

The magistrate attached great importance toAmina's "good background, well well--off family andoutstanding academic achievement". Saying she wasa sick person who needed help rather than a bad one,he put her on probation for one year for assaulting apolice officer, fined her $8,000 for refusing to provide abreath sample and suspended her licence for one yearfor careless driving. According to lawyers, a firstoffender of the crime of assaulting a police officershould be jailed, though a magistrate may be justifiedin taking certain factors into account and showingleniency. However, it is unacceptable not to jail aperson who has again committed the offence. It istotally unacceptable not to have jailed the defendant(guilty for the third time of the offence).

Furthermore, according to lawyers, the court doesnot normally admit intoxication or bipolar disorder asa defence or ground for mitigation. In 2008, Aminapleaded bipolar disorder in defence and mitigationwhen she was tried for the second time for assaulting apolice officer. She resorted to the same trick. The courtdid not declare whether she received treatment for thedisorder during the two intervening years. However,the court ought not to allow any person suffering froma disorder to keep relying on it to bully others.

The police are disgruntled at Amina's lightsentence. A netizen has set up a Facebook group todemand strongly that the Secretary for Justice tointervene and secure Kemal Bokhary's niece's severepunishment. The call has drawn splendid response. Atof yesterday, over 10,000 people had joined the group.It is just one of the things the Secretary for Justicemust do to allay public resentment. The affair concernsthe rule of law. The Secretary for Justice has a duty toascertain whether the magistrate's decision isappropriate. Magistrates often hear cases of drinkdriving or assaulting a police officer and, in such trials,the Amina case may be cited as a precedent. If othermagistrates ruled as Anthony Yuen did, wouldoffenders not have to be put behind bars?

Society does not want the court to be harshtowards celebrities or their relatives. It only expects itto deal with them as it does others - to take facts asthe basis and the law as the criterion.

"Not only must justice be done; it must also beseen to be done." It is quite clear that the Amina casefails this test. The Secretary for Justice ought to seek aremedy. Under the existing procedures, he mayrequire a retrial by the same magistrate (AnthonyYuen). If he finds the retrial unsatisfactory, he mayrefer the case to the Court of First Instance. It isincumbent upon the Secretary for Justice tosafeguard the rule of law. We hope he will take actionto put the Amina case right so that the public will seejustice is upheld.

明報社評 三度襲警均免囚司法公義蒙陰影

終審法院常任法官包致金的侄女Amina MariamBokhary （以下稱Amina Amina）， ），99 年來33 次被控襲警罪，分別都罪名成立或認罪，但是她都先後獲得法官輕判，毋須坐牢，情况極其罕有。

一般名人或名人親屬涉及刑事案件，由於他們有財有勢，本來已經有先天優勢，包括有財力聘請大律師甚至資深大律師，為他們挖空心思打官司，也可以請權威醫生寫健康報告。另外，也可以動員社會名流為品格證人，作為向法官求情之用。

就Amina 而言，除了上述優勢，她的叔父包致金身為終審法院常任法官、她的嬸嬸包鍾倩薇是高院原訟庭法官，他們兩人在司法界的顯赫地位，會否成為被告另一層優勢，在侄女的案件中起過作用，正是此案宣判後，引發輿論熱烈討論的原因，也是許多人心中疑問的關鍵所在。

至於判決，裁判官重視Amina 的良好背景、美滿家庭及教育，更認為她並非壞人，是需要接受幫助的病人，就襲警罪只判她接受11 年感化；其餘拒絕提供呼氣樣本及不小心駕駛，則分別判她罰款8000 元及停牌11 年。不過，法律界人士認為，初犯襲警罪，已經可以判處入獄，基於一些考慮寬大處理，還可以接受，但是再犯仍然不判囚，則不能接受，被告第三次襲警，竟然獲得輕判，毋須入獄，更是無法接受。

另外，法律界人士又認為酗酒和躁狂抑鬱症，作為抗辯和求情理由，一般情况下，不會得到法庭接受，况且在 Amina 的案件中，她2008 年第二次襲警時，已經用躁鬱症來抗辯和求情，這次她故技重施，但是兩年來是否就此接受過治療，法庭並沒有交代。法庭總不能容許恃病凌人的情况，繼續存在。

Amina 獲得輕判，警隊反彈甚大，有網民在facebook設立一個「強烈要求律政司介入，重判包致金侄女」的群組，可謂一呼百應，到昨日已有逾萬人加入。律政司要撫平民情，只是事態的其中一面，就算在法治層面，律政司也有責任釐清判決是否恰當。因為裁判法院審理很多這類酒後駕駛和襲警案，而Amina 的案例，有可能會被援引。其他法官若都像阮偉明般判決，這樣就突出了同類案件的被告，是否都不用坐牢的問題。

對於名人或名人親屬，社會人士並非認為要嚴苛對待他們，只是期望法庭實事求是，正常的「以事實為基礎，以法律為準繩」，與其他各色人等一視同仁而已。司法公義不但要做得到，在實踐過程中也要使公衆看得到。Amina 的案件，顯然未能滿足這個準則的檢驗要求。律政司必須尋求補救，按現有程序，律政司可提出覆核，由原審裁判官阮偉明處理， 律政司若仍然不滿覆核結果，則可交由高院原訟庭覆核。捍衛法治是律政司的責任，期望律政司採取行動，就Amina 的案件，還香港和市民一個公道。

Glossary

intoxication //IInn ?tt ??ks ksII''ke keII ʃʃ((??)n/)being under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

disgruntled /d dIIss''gr ??ntld/ ntld/cross and dissatisfied.

incumbent //IInn''kk ??mb mb ??nt/ nt/If it is incumbent upon you to do something, itis your duty to do it.