By: Nadia Lam、Erin ChanEdited by: Holly Chik、Angie Chan、Michelle Ng

The charge of inciting people to incite others to commit public nuisance against the "Occupy Central" founding trio, Benny Tai Yiu-ting, Chan Kin-man and Chu Yiu-ming, was ruled  "constitutional" by the court this morning. Judge Johnny Chan Jong-herng believed that the charge "exists in the common law", saying that there is nothing "uncertain" and "unconstitutional" of the charge. The trio, Tai, Chan and Chu, was accused of three charges altogether: (1) conspiracy to commit public nuisance, (2) incitement to commit public nuisance and (3) inciting people to incite others to commit public nuisance. Defence Senior Counsel Gerard McCoy had argued that the third charge, inciting people to incite others to commit public nuisance, was neither justiciable nor constitutional in previous trials, and thus proposing a motion to rescind this charge. The judge was not convinced though, saying that inciting people to incite others is different from inciting to commit public nuisance and "cannot be treated in one single charge". Chan Kin-man, one of the Occupy Central founders, expressed his disappointment to the court after the hearing. "We are disappointed that the court accepts the incitement to incite is a lawful charge in this case," he said. "This is unprecedented." McCoy had previously argued that the prosecutor failed to provide detailed information such as the identity of involved people. But the judge stated that the prosecutor had made it clear. "Adequate and appropriate information has been given," said the judge. There had been a discussion about whether the single trial for the nine defendants could be split. The judge eventually decided to stay as a bound trial, implying that all nine defendants are to be tried and testified together even though Raphael Wong Ho-ming and Lee Wing-tat were accused of committing the crimes in places different from the rest. The judge also compared the incitement to a …

Alex Chow, Joshua Wong, and Nathan Law walk free as Court of Final Appeal accepts their appeal this afternoon. The trio was initially arrested for breaking into the Central Government Offices and for "civil disobedience" in September 2014, which triggered the Occupy Central. However, Wong said that even though they regained their freedom, this is by no means a victory for democracy. "This set the precedent of demonstrations being viewed as violent," Wong said, "which puts all future attempts of public assembly at risk. Those who attend may receive months or years of jail sentence." Furthermore, Chow said that the lines of what is considered as violent demonstration has been blurred through this case, which is unhelpful to Hong Kong's fight for democracy. He called the court's ruling "sugar coated". The trio raised concerns that with the recent disqualification of Agnes Chow, Hong Kong is going through a very tough time. Alex Chow ultimately said that it is obvious that people in the government are under pressure to behave a certain way. The trio is free for now. But Joshua Wong faces another appeal for "contempt of court" which will soon decide whether he remains free or goes back to jail.