magnify sound apart from loud-hailer" in public places:
i.
assembly being held in a public place near residential area;
ii. assembly being held in a public place near commercial
buildings during office hours;
iii.assembly being held in a private place adjacent to or
in a residential area after 11:00p.m.;
iv. assembly being held in a public place which is not
a designated place for the holding of assembly and the area is meanwhile shared by other people.
It is quite clear that the above restrictions do not include loud-speaker, and they are only applicable when the public is under disturbance. Therefore, the prosecution is, in fact, incompatible with the report being handed to the Human Right Commission of the United Nation, and also a contravention of its commitment under the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights.
of
According to Article 21 of the Convenant, "The right peaceful assembly shall be recognised. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the intersts of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals
or the protection of the rights and freedom of others.' Therefore, unless the assembly violates the special conditions. stated above, the public should not be prohibited from using the right of assembly as a basic human right.
零零
is
However, subject to Section 3 of the Public Order Ordinance, a public assembly for the purpose of the discussion of issues or matters of interest or concern to the general public is considered as unauthorized if participants exceeding 30 people, unless they have notified the Commissioner of Police in not less than seven days prior
prior to the date on which the meeting intended to be held and has not been rejected. The Ordinance also stipulates that public procession consists of more than 20 people and taking place on public highways,
public highways, public thoroughfares, or public parks must be authorized by a licence issued in writing by the Commissioner of Police, otherwise, the procession will be condsidered as unauthorized. Meanwhile, the Commissioner of Police may impose additional conditions in respect of any public assembly and procession. These controls apply to various areas including any printed matters, banners and related matters.
Obviously, the vesting of police officers with such an extensive authority to make crucial decisions concerning the freedom of association and assembly is far beyond the level of acceptance in a democratic society.
Besides, Section 4 (17) of Summary Offences Ordinance stipulates that anyone may be charged with collecting money in a public place without a permit issued by the Director of Social Welfare. However, the "public place" stated therein and the nature and pattern of collecting money are not clearly defined. As a consequence, any activities concerning collecting money in public places, including contribution to churches and mutual-aid committee are under the control of the Director of Social Welfare. Then, if the Church and mutual-aid committee do not ask for permits, do their actions of collecting donations considered as violating law? If it is true and they have not been accused of committing offences, do this signify different interpretation of the same Ordinance under different conditions? Besides, the