TNAG-0498-FCO40-563-Deportation-of-foreign-nationals-from-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 100

JUDGEMENT

The thirty-three defendants have been charged with an offence under section 4(2)(b) of the Hong Kong Airport (Regs.) Ord. Cap. 292 which can briefly be described as entering an area of the airport to

which members of the public are not for the time being permitted, without the permission of the D.C.A. or of an authorized person. A11 were represented before me and all have pleaded guilty to the offence,

It is convenient to divide the defendants into two groups for reasons which will become apparent. The first group, consisting of

twenty-two persons, were apparently relatives, friends or sympathizers of certain illegal South Vietnamese immigrants who, on the evening the offence was committed, were being transported back to Vietnam. There

was apparently a widely held belief by these persons that the deportees

may be subjected to excessive or severe penalties on their return to Vietnam, and as a result of this belief these persons were apparently isay. highly emotional state, many of them possibly believing they may be bidding farewell to their relatives and friends for the last time.

The second group, consisting of some eleven persons, comprised

members of the press, photographers, journalists and reporters etc.

The facts on which I am to decide the matter have been agreed on by defence counsel and counsel for the prosecution. I set them out very briefly here. At about 9.40 p.m. on 16.6.74. the relatives and friends

of the departing refugees were demonstrating vocally their opposition to the deporting of the Vietnamese refugees. This attracted, naturally

enough, the attention of members of the press and media. Some

uncuccessful attempts were made by the demonstrators to gain access to the restricted area of the airport but these were prevented by police

Eventually, however, at about 0045 hours on 17.6.74. a number

of persons, including the thirty-three defendants, managed to gain access to the apron and parking bays of the airport, a restricted area, by running through a cargo warehouse and then a security gate. Apparently one police constable was on guard duty at this gate, but it is alleged by all defendants, and I am prepared to accept it as a fact, that he

at the theme. was not noticed by any of the defendants. This was possibly because a

^ number of other persons who were not subsequently apprehended, went through this gate with the defendants, and the police officer on duty may have gone for assistance. As a result of police re-inforcements being called to the scene all the defendants were arrested and subsequently charged. I should also mention that it was the relatives and friends of the refugees who passed through the security gate first and these were closely followed by the other group the members of the press etc.

31