【陈同佳案】林钰雄／香港人不懂台湾到底在吵什么？

▲港女箱尸命案凶嫌陈同佳出狱后鞠躬道歉。（图／香港01授权提供）

●林钰雄／台湾大学法律学院教授、刑事法研究会执行长

香港人不懂台湾陈案到底在吵什么。转引一位香港律师来问的问题，他是香港抗争运动者，也曾公开投过书（别问谁）：「为何陈来台 台湾就会丧失国家主权？」

关于我日前投书文章的第一个提问：「先提一个问题：蔡政府这样一口咬定香港有本案管辖权，真的有把握吗？如果『前提』错了呢？」

今天单单苹果评论就两篇香港大律师和泛民主派议员（可不是护航逃犯条例的建制派）的投书，说明为何香港根本没有管辖权 （但港府当然可以也应该设法协助陈案的港台合作）。

香港民主党副主席、立法会议员尹兆坚：

「由于台港两地的法制差异，香港法律下确实难以侦办及审理在海外发生的杀人案件，即所谓案件的司法属地原则。」

香港大律师 林忌：

「除非香港采纳早前大律师公会的建议，另立法律去处理境外杀人，否则已没有方法，在本地去处理陈同佳杀人的罪行。」

但以上关于「台湾」法律的描述，未尽正确，以后容有机会再来辩驳。这也充分凸显比较法制之难度。

香港法院同此见解：

再看一下香港法院在陈案说了什么？（v. 我国政府声明:港府有无管辖权部分，应由香港法院作出正式裁定，绝对不会私了）：

‘Great frustration’

“It is understandable that great frustration and a genuine sense of unfairness, to say the least, would be felt when an accused’s admission about killing someone outside this jurisdiction could not be a basis to bring a murder or manslaughter charge in Hong Kong,”

Judge Anthea Pang said "great frustration and a serious sense of unfairness" should not overshadow the fact that the case was a money laundering prosecution, not a murder trial.

引述段落：

42. That said, it is understandable that great frustration and a genuine sense of unfairness, to say the least, would be felt when an accused’s admission about killing someone outside this jurisdiction could not be a basis to bring a murder/manslaughter charge in HK. However, justice equally demands that an accused is to be sentenced on the basis of the offences with which he has been charged and of which he has been convicted, not on any other offences or matters, albeit matters which may disclose much greater criminality than the offences charged.

43. We should never lose sight of the fact that no matter how likely an accused has actually committed a most heinous crime, he is entitled to the full protection of his rights associated with a fair trial. If it were otherwise, it would mean short-circuiting our criminal procedure and this affects not only the accused, but also the integrity of our entire criminal justice system. These are fundamental principles which should always be borne in mind.

44. Now, other than the disputed paragraphs, there is full acceptance on the part of the defence that the Accused knew that the properties he dealt with were proceeds arising from the thefts he committed on the deceased whom, admittedly, he himself had killed.

热门推荐》►香港政府对台湾的漂亮打击►港籍杀人犯投案　遮掩心机的「反送台」？►随时加入观点与讨论，给云论粉丝团按个赞！

●本文获作者授权，转载自脸书「Duschen Baer」。以上言论不代表本网立场，《云论》提供公民发声平台，欢迎能人志士、各方好手投稿，请点此投稿。