The stewardess beef rice proprietress Guo Deying believed that the content of the Hong Kong and Taiwan programs was biased, and the private prosecution of the then director of broadcasting, Liang Jiarong, was rejected by the magistrate.
Guo refused to accept the decision, and pointed out that Xu Zhifeng, who also applied for private prosecution, was allowed to continue the prosecution and appealed that it was unfair.
However, Guo’s case raises another question: When considering this type of application, the magistrate should consider whether the evidence is valid or whether the case has a reasonable chance of successful conviction.
Both the Attorney General and the Friends of the Court sent representatives to debate this legal issue.
The Court of Appeal today (17th) adjourned the ruling after hearing the submissions.
The Court of Appeal reiterated that the Magistrate did not make a mistake in rejecting Guo's application
The appellant Guo Deying, the Secretary for Justice is an interested party in this case, and Senior Counsel Huang Peiqi acted as an amicus curiae to assist the court in discussing related legal issues.
The Chief Justice of the High Court, Pan Zhaochu, pointed out that the Attorney General and the friends of the court agreed that the magistrate refused to accept Guo's case without making a mistake.
The two parties also agreed to challenge the magistrate to not accept a private prosecution decision, a judicial review should be filed, rather than in the form of an appeal in the Magistrates' Court.
Guo Deying was refused an appeal on his private prosecution, but the Court of Appeal said that the trial officer had made no mistakes, but the case has led to another legal dispute.
(New photo by Zhu Di)
The Department of Justice believes that higher standards should be considered
The representatives of the Department of Justice later argued on legal issues and pointed out that when considering whether to accept private prosecution applications, the magistrate should adopt a higher standard, that is, whether the case has a reasonable chance of conviction, as a benchmark for legal testing, otherwise innocent people or more It is easy to be prosecuted by private individuals, and those who are prosecuted will also be under a lot of pressure.
However, Judge Li Yunteng questioned whether there would be a judgment without trial based on this standard.
The defense believes that only evidence should be considered
Senior Counsel Huang Peiqi, who was present as a friend of the court, spoke as a defense. She believed that the existence of prima facie evidence should be the legal test, and pointed out that the magistrate was only considering whether to accept a private prosecution, rather than a small trial.
Guo Deying also spoke in the court, emphatically saying that she was just a small citizen and had no legal knowledge, but discovered injustice and illegal things, and hoped that the society would improve.
She also pointed out that she and Xu Zhifeng also filed private prosecutions, but the private prosecution was approved by the magistrate. The questioning scale was different, and they considered it very unfair.
However, Pan Guan pointed out that his statement is not relevant to the discussion topic.
Case number: HCMA216/2020
The private prosecution of the stewardess beef rice owner refused to be filed. The appellant said that legal issues were transferred to the court for trial. The stewardess beef rice owner filed a private prosecution and the magistrate Leung Ka Wing refused to approve the application.
01News