TNAG-0498-FCO40-563-Deportation-of-foreign-nationals-from-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 101

2

It seems apparent that the security arrangements at the airport, in so far as they apply in a situation such as this, leave a lot to be desired. It appears that the so-called 'security gate' controlling access from a cargo area on to the apron and parking bays of the airport was not locked and was manned by a single police constable at a time when it should have been apparent that a difficult situation could arise. From the facts before me the length of time which elapsed between the first vocal demonstration and the actual entry into the restricted area

was almost three hours,

32

It seems surprising to me that during this time no steps were taken to prevent access to the tarmac through the cargo area and the so-called In saying 'security gate' through which access was eventually effected. this I also think it pertinent to comment on the number of prosecutions against individuale for entering the restricted area of the airport which have come before this court in recent months, and on the fact that in a large percentage of these cases the person concerned is arrested on leaving the restricted area not on entry to it, and in many of such cases the entry into the restricted area has gone unchallenged.

·

These matters I consider relevant when it comes to imposing a sentence on those failing to comply with the regulations. In the present case counsel for the prosecution has submitted that there should be a differentiation when it comes to sentence between the two groups involved. With this I entirely agree. The fact that the first group who entered

Z

G

were under stress and in a highly emotional state would to my mind, render them less culpable for their actions than the members of the second group, who followed them. It was urged on behalf of the second group that they only entered in the course of duty to cover the incident by reports and photographs for the benefit of the public. There is no doubt that this was so, but on the other hand I am quite satisfied that each of them knew, or ought to have known, that he was not entitled to enter this particular area of the airport even in the course of duty, without the necessary permit issued by the Director, In doing so I consider that they acted irresponsibly, and in a manner that could only be regarded as bringing their profession into disrepute. The present maximum penalty for this offence is $500. I do not agree with the submissions of some defence counsel that it was only a 'technical' offence so I intend to impose more than just a nominal penalty. In the case of defendants numbers 1-11 I convict and impose a fine of $200 in each case,

In the case of the other twenty-two defendants, numbers 12-33, the friends, relatives and sympathizers of the deported refugees, each is bound over in the sum of $50 for a period of six months and in these

cases I order that no conviction be recorded.

a

{lu.

2/7/74