Today is the 4th anniversary of the 6.12 riots. Looking back at the nightmarish years of the black violence, I still feel terrified and heartbroken when I think about it. This turmoil not only left painful lessons and deep wounds, but some knots are still unresolved. One of them is that more than 6,000 people arrested in the riots have not yet been prosecuted. There are many discussions in the society on how to deal with it. Some people proposed to set a period of prosecution, and release all those who passed the prosecution period, which is equivalent to “amnesty” in disguise. A friend who knows the matter told me that the Department of Justice has reservations about this practice and believes that it is not in line with judicial principles.
The 6.12 riots opened the prelude to the riots. A large number of radicals were arrested. So far, more than 6,000 people have not been dealt with. Some people in the society proposed “amnesty”, but the Department of Justice has reservations about this and does not agree to set a deadline for the release of the whole group .
The black riots that lasted for many months were like an urban war. The militants were instigated into a state of madness, and a large number of people were arrested in the riots. According to police figures, by the end of October 2020, a total of 10,279 people had been arrested, of which nearly 3,000 had completed or entered judicial procedures, and more than 6,000 were still being processed. Xiao Zeyi, the “first brother” of the police force, once said that how to deal with it will be determined in February this year, but no specific plan has been announced yet.
From the perspective of compassion, some people suggested setting a period of prosecution, after which all those who were not dealt with would be “released”, thinking that only in this way can society recover and wounds can be healed.
However, friends familiar with the matter pointed out that the Department of Justice does not agree with this kind of “amnesty” approach, and believes that it violates several judicial principles: First, according to Hong Kong law, there is no retroactive period for criminal cases. In some cases, if new evidence is discovered, or Some people make more reports, and the police will continue to investigate. There is no such thing as “it will be automatically terminated on that day”. Some suspects were prosecuted more than ten years after the incident.
During the riots, more than 10,000 people were arrested. Some of them may be involved in more serious crimes. It is not appropriate to draw a line across the board so that they can get away with it.
In addition, the seriousness of the case will change due to the results of the police investigation. After the time limit for prosecution is “released”, the repeat offender can escape justice.
Another problem with the one-size-fits-all “release of life” is that different cases are inextricably linked. The arrested person may be involved in different cases, and may even be related to the violation of the “Hong Kong National Security Law”. After investigation, the Department of Justice decides how to prosecute according to the facts of the case. Therefore, the Department of Justice will not accept simply drawing a line and not prosecuting after a certain period of time.
As for the black rioters who fled to other places after being arrested, they are still on the wanted list. Once they return to Hong Kong, they will be arrested and prosecuted. If the authorities set a prosecution period, they can get away from the brigade. The Department of Justice and The police will also not let these people slip through the net because of the “amnesty”.
A friend pointed out that the police actually wanted to “release” some arrested persons who committed minor crimes as soon as possible so that they could reform themselves, but they also considered that some people might be involved in more serious crimes, or that new evidence might be found, and that they were found to be similar to other major crimes. In relation to this case, if they are rashly granted “amnesty” together with misdemeanors, not only does it not conform to the principle of legal justice, but it will also make them engage in radical actions again, which will pose hidden dangers to social security.
Recently, the police have notified hundreds of arrestees that they will not prosecute or close the case. It seems that the police are speeding up the process of “release” and it is estimated that more people will be notified. Some of those who committed crimes under the age of 18 were arrested The policeman gave a warning. However, the police, like the Department of Justice, are not inclined to “amnesty” a large number of arrested persons across the board.
Not long after the anti-amendment riots, some people also proposed “amnesty” for those arrested, thinking that it could calm social conflicts. This was proposed almost at the same time as the proposal to establish a committee to investigate the police force. In hindsight, if we really did this at the time, the radicals felt that they had won the battle, and they could take advantage of the victory to pursue it, and the subsequent storm would only be bigger.
The storm is calming down a bit today, but if a large number of people do not have to pay the price for participating in the riots through “amnesty”, will it speed up the recovery of society? Or make the undercurrent more rapid? It’s a big question mark!
Tokihito Monogatari
**Blog articles are at your own risk and do not represent the position of the company**
