1
13. We think that in sub-s. (3) the officers should be empowered to give only such orders "as may be necessary or expe- dient" and that once again it is dangerous and unnecessary to give them an absolute discretion. It is to be noted that the existing
section does not give them an absolute discretion in relation to the use of force and there seems to be no justification for the wide discretion in relation to the giving of orders. Once again, this provision must not be looked at in isolation from the other pro- visions in the Ordinance.
Section 12
14 Sub-s.(2) makes an unlicensed assembly or a disobedient
יי דיי
assembly of three or more an unlawful assembly without any need to show the possibility of a breach of the peace which is otherwise required under s.18. Nor is it certain that a person is guilty of an offence under sub-s. (3) only if he persists in his conduct after a police officer has declared the meeting to be unlawful: he already may be guilty merely by virtue of his presence, however innocent his intentions. In this connexion it is noted that under sub-s.(3) it is an offence merely to form part or to continue to form part of an assembly deemed to be unlawful, whereas under s.18 (which actually creates the offence of unlawful assembly and makes it a more serious offence in that it contemplates a breach of the peace) the accused must actively take part. It is difficult to see why there should be this distinction and we think that it is dangerous to include the words, "or forms or continues to form part of", since they may lead in practice to the conviction of mere idle spectators. In our view it is desirable that every offen- ce under this section should expressly import mens rea.
Section 14
on s.33.
15 See comments on definition of "offensive weapon" and
732
6.