2.19.2008

what kind of balance we need?

兩天的聆訊暫告一段落,我們都累得不得了,首要回家好好休息。
夏正民在今天下午,不斷強調關鍵疑問:此節目是否應該在此時(合家歡時段)在兒童及青少年面前播放,而沒有家長指引?片中有關同性婚姻的討論,他指出無疑是敏感及有爭議性的話題(而非有關同志的話題),甚至在同志群體間亦有爭議性,因而被強烈勸喻。
我方的大律師提出:what kind of balance we need?
爭議性本身正正意味著「同性婚姻」有問題。
結果將於serveral weeks之後公佈。

標籤:

1 Comments:

Anonymous 匿名 said...

According to the
SUMMARY OFFENCES ORDINANCE
Chapter: 228
Section: 7

Prohibition on taking photographs, etc., in court

1) Any person who-
(a) takes or attempts to take in any court any photograph, or with a view to publication makes or attempts to make in any court any portrait or sketch, of any person, being a judge of the court or a juror or a witness in or a party to any proceeding before the court, whether civil or criminal; or (Amended L.N. 7 of 1979)
(b) publishes any photograph, portrait or sketch taken or make in contravention of the foregoing provisions of this section or any reproduction thereof,
shall be liable to a fine of
$250.
(2) For the purposes of this section-
(a) the expression "court" (法庭) means any court of justice, including any place in which an inquiry is being held by a magistrate;
(b) the expression "judge" (法官) includes registrar and magistrate; (Amended 47 of 1997 s. 10)
(c) a photograph, portrait or sketch shall be deemed to be a photograph, portrait or sketch taken or made in court if it is taken or made in the court-room or in the building or in the precincts of the building in which the court is held, or if it is a photograph, portrait or sketch taken or made of the person while he is entering or leaving the court-room or any such building or precincts as aforesaid.


下次吾好啦,大拿拿250大元架, 當然重有其他後果法例吾會寫明

23:39  

發佈留言

<< Home