Highlights of 2006 and 2007

Initiatives and reforms

IAP Annual Conference

In September 2007, the Prosecutions Division hosted the 12th Annual Conference and General Meeting of the International Association of Prosecutors. The theme was "Relations with others: accountability, transparency and independence". Through an examination of how best they should relate to others in their communities, the prosecutors of the world reviewed the future development of their prosecution services and what was required of them to satisfy the expectations of the public.

The conference was opened by the Chief Executive, and attended by 455 ministers of justice, attorneys general, chief prosecutors and prosecutors, representing 100 jurisdictions.

Prosecutions Division's Strategic Development Programme 2007-2012

Following the successful completion of its Strategic Plan 2002-2007, the Prosecutions Division prepared its Strategic Development Programme 2007-2012 (SDP). The SDP was drafted by a Committee of Prosecutors after an extensive consultation exercise, and submitted to the Secretary for Justice by the Director of Public Prosecutions in December 2006. The SDP contains a comprehensive plan of action covering key areas of prosecutorial responsibility, and seeks to modernise, develop and strengthen the Prosecutions Division, and to equip it to meet future challenges. In its first full year of operation, the SDP provided prosecutors with a clear sense of direction, and supplied an appropriate focus to their efforts to modernise and reform.

Prosecution policy towards domestic violence

In November 2006, the Prosecutions Division issued its new deal for victims of domestic violence when it published The Policy for Prosecuting Cases involving Domestic Violence. This set benchmarks for prosecutors, and indicates how prosecutors believe that domestic violence victims should be treated, and how their interests are to be protected. The policy reflects a determination to handle all such cases appropriately, and to work within a multi-agency context to promote better arrangements at all levels. The published policy:

• explains the prosecutor's role
• considers charging policy
• examines the role of the victim
• identifies best practice
• prioritises victim support
• promotes appropriate levels of sentence.
  

Enhancement of IT capability

A range of initiatives were undertaken during 2006 and 2007 to enhance the department's information technology (IT) capability. These included:

the replacement of the Work Management System (WMS) servers to improve the system performance, reliability and security in providing up-to-date information about work assignments, workload and work progress of the cases handled a phased programme to upgrade the Department's personal computers and LCD monitors a phased programme to upgrade the pool of notebook computers a project to improve the computer facilities / services for offices at the magistracies a project to improve the email services at a sub-office by installation of local mail servers the implementation of an automatic email archive scheme for the mailboxes of all email users through the provision of a centralised archive storage and a periodic archival programme the replacement of the hardware and system software of the Lotus Notes mail system and the confidential mail system servers to cater for the growth in workload the upgrade of the software of the existing remote access system, which allows staff to access the department's computer systems through the department's intranet or the internet the setting up of a remote access facility in the departmental network based on Virtual Private Network (VPN) to allow directorate officers and officers with operational needs to access classified information in the department's computer systems through the internet while away from their offices the conduct of an IT security audit and risk assessment on the department's IT infrastructure and major computer systems the provision of customised IT training for staff in order to further enhance their IT knowledge and skills

Expansion of BLIS to include major bilateral arrangements with the Mainland and with the Macao SAR

As part of an ongoing effort to increase transparency and to facilitate public access to inter-governmental agreements and arrangements applying to the HKSAR, the department's Bilingual Laws Information System (BLIS) website was expanded in early 2007 to include a new webpage on major bilateral arrangements between the HKSAR and the Mainland and the Macao SAR. The project is ongoing and members of International Law Division and the IT Management Unit work closely in setting up and maintaining the webpage.

Establishment of the Community Legal Information Centre (CLIC) website

As one of its initiatives in the area of access to justice, the department has made a significant contribution to the establishment of a bilingual community legal information website for Hong Kong. The "Community Legal Information Centre" or "CLIC" website, which has been developed over a three-year period by the China Information Technology and Law Centre of the University of Hong Kong in conjunction with the department, provides a user-friendly guide to legal information on a wide range of topics affecting people's daily lives, as well as information on legal services available in Hong Kong.

Since the launch of the first phase of the website on 6 May 2005, the content of CLIC has been expanded to cover 21 topics, including an introduction to the Hong Kong legal system, how to apply for legal aid, anti-discrimination, bankruptcy and winding up, bringing or defending a civil case, business and commerce, consumer complaints, defamation, employment disputes, immigration, insurance, intellectual property, landlord and tenant, matrimonial matters, medical negligence, personal data privacy, personal injuries, police and crime, probate, sale and purchase of property, and taxation. A ceremony to mark the completion of the three-year project to establish the website took place on 14 May 2007. CLIC can be found on the internet at www.clic.org.hk or www.hkclic.org.

The Arrangement on Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters between the Mainland and Hong Kong

In addition to the agreements with the Mainland authorities on the Service of Judicial Documents and Reciprocal Enforcement of Arbitral Awards reached in 1999, the department has, in collaboration with the Chief Secretary's Office, sought to establish a mechanism for reciprocal enforcement of court judgments between the Mainland and Hong Kong. On 14 July 2006, the HKSARG and the Supreme People's Court of the PRC signed the "Arrangement on Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters by the Courts of the Mainland and of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Pursuant to Choice of Court Agreements between Parties Concerned" ("the Arrangement").

Under the Arrangement, parties may seek to enforce specific commercial judgments obtained from the courts in one jurisdiction in the other. To implement the Arrangement, the Mainland Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Bill was introduced into the Legislative Council on 7 March 2007 and subsequently referred to a Bills Committee for scrutiny. In the Mainland, the Supreme People's Court will promulgate a judicial interpretation for the purpose of implementing the Arrangement which will come into effect simultaneously with the Hong Kong legislation.

The implementation of the Arrangement will benefit those business sectors engaging in business activities with the Mainland as the court judgments of one jurisdiction can be enforced in the other without the need to go through time consuming and costly litigation proceedings. This will also help develop the HKSAR as a centre for dispute resolution and the provision of legal services for the international business community.

The Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA)

The legal services liberalisation measures of CEPA came into effect on 1 January 2004, giving the Hong Kong legal profession easier access to the Mainland services market. Four Supplementary Agreements to CEPA have since been signed by the Central Government and the HKSARG, with the latest of these promulgated on 29 June 2007.

Various new liberalisation measures have been introduced under Supplement III to CEPA (signed on 26 June 2006) which came into effect on 1 January 2007. The new measures include lifting the residency requirement for representatives stationed in representative offices of Hong Kong law firms in the Mainland, permitting Hong Kong residents who have qualified as Mainland lawyers to act as agents in matrimonial and succession cases relating to Hong Kong in the capacity of Mainland lawyers, and to undergo internship in a branch office of a Mainland law firm set up in Hong Kong. A ground breaking measure has also been introduced which allows Hong Kong barristers to act as agents in civil litigation cases in the Mainland in the capacity of citizen.

As for the forming of associations between Mainland and Hong Kong law firms, Supplement III to CEPA relaxed the requirements as to the number of qualified lawyers in Mainland law firms in such associations, while Supplement IV to CEPA removes with effect from 1 January 2008 the requirement that Mainland law firms in an association may only be situated in certain prescribed localities. Hong Kong law firms can now enjoy greater flexibility in entering associations with Mainland law firms. Together with the other liberalisation measures, Hong Kong legal professionals should be able to cooperate with their Mainland counterparts more effectively and to develop their practice in the Mainland market more efficiently.

National Judicial Examination (NJE)

Since the implementation of CEPA, Hong Kong permanent residents who are Chinese nationals have been allowed to sit the annual NJE. To make it more convenient for Hong Kong residents to sit the examination, examination centres have been set up in Hong Kong pursuant to the "Memorandum of Discussion on Matters Regarding the Organisation of Hong Kong Citizens Sitting the State Judicial Examination" signed between the department and the Ministry of Justice in May 2005. The Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority is responsible for the administration of the NJE in Hong Kong, which is held each September. In 2006, a total of 182 Hong Kong residents sat the examination in Hong Kong, with eight persons passing, and in 2007, 143 candidates sat the examination, with ten passing.

Reform of arbitration law in Hong Kong

The Arbitration Ordinance (Cap 341) has been subject to criticism that it is too complex and difficult to understand and has failed to keep pace with the needs of the modern arbitration community, domestically and globally. A committee was established in 1998 by the Hong Kong Institute of Arbitrators, in co-operation with the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, to look at ways to revamp the provisions of the Ordinance. In a report published in April 2003, the committee recommended that the Ordinance should be completely redrawn to make it more user-friendly by applying the Model Law of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law equally to both domestic and international arbitrations in Hong Kong. This would remove the existing distinction between the two types of arbitrations in the Ordinance and replace it with a single regime.

With the support of the Legislative Council's Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services, in September 2005 the department set up a working group to carry forward the reform proposals in the report. The working group assisted the department in preparing the necessary draft legislation, which was issued as part of a consultation paper in December 2007.

Notable cases

Criminal

In So Wai-lun v HKSAR [2006] 3 HKLRD 394, the Court of Final Appeal held that the offence of unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 16 was constitutional, even though it involved absolute liability. Although the accused complained that the offence was arbitrary and departed from equality of treatment as it criminalised the conduct of the male to the exclusion of the female, the Court decided this was justifiable on the basis of genuine need, rationality and proportionality. As there was a need to protect young girls, the imposition of absolute liability was a choice which was constitutionally open to the legislature to make.

In HKSAR v Jackson-Lipkin and Another (KCCC 637/2006), a former High Court judge and his barrister wife, both in their eighties, were sentenced to 11 months' imprisonment for social welfare fraud. The evidence showed that they defrauded the government of $101,344 in welfare payments between 2003 and 2005, and also obtained a public housing flat. The accused applied for welfare in 2003, but failed to disclose assets of $1.92 million, and a flat in Vancouver. Although an appellate court subsequently ordered the release of the accused as an act of mercy, given their age and infirmity, it nonetheless said that the original sentence was justified and sent a clear message to those who cheated on welfare.

In HKSAR v Au Kwok-man (HCCC 175/2005), the accused was charged with the murder of a Dutch national. The prosecution alleged that the accused was a contract-killer who shot the victim repeatedly in the chest while he dined at a restaurant. Reliance was placed upon DNA evidence which put the accused at the scene. The prosecution case was that the accused had been paid $50,000 to carry out the killing, although in his own defence he testified that at the time of the killing he was at a nearby supermarket buying beer. The jury acquitted the accused of the murder by a majority verdict of six to one.

In Secretary for Justice v Yau Yuk-lung and Another [2007] 3 HKLRD 903, the accused were charged with the offence of committing buggery with each other otherwise than in private, but the magistrate held the offence was unconstitutional and dismissed the charges. After the prosecution appealed, the Court of Final Appeal decided that the offence provision targeted a group defined by sexual orientation (namely, homosexual men) and departed from identical treatment. In dismissing the appeal, the Court decided that there was no demonstrable genuine need for this departure, and the conduct in question was in any event prosecutable under the common law offence of outraging public decency, which did not have the effect of targeting any particular group.

In Secretary for Justice v Liu Chi-yung [2007] 1 HKC 570, the prosecution sought a review of a sentence of six years' imprisonment imposed upon an accused who stabbed a police officer in the neck with a knife during an identity card check. The officer, aged 33 years, was reduced to a near vegetative state, and had to undergo constant and extensive medical treatment. The Court of Appeal commented that the injuries were catastrophic, and that the public interest in having an effective, responsible and brave police force could not be over emphasised. The use of violence against members of the police force in the discharge of their duties could not be tolerated, and heavy sentences were inevitable. The Court increased the sentence to 10 years' imprisonment.

In Secretary for Justice v Poon Wing-kay and Another [2007] 1 HKC 289, two minibus drivers were convicted after trial of causing death by dangerous driving and of causing harm to persons by racing vehicles. The prosecution alleged that in the early morning they raced their minibuses in North Point, driving through two sets of traffic lights and terrifying those on board. Following a series of collisions, two people were killed and seventeen others were injured. After the prosecution argued that sentences of imprisonment of, respectively, 24 months and 30 months, coupled with two years' disqualification, were unduly lenient, the Court of Appeal said the public must be protected. Sentences of five years' imprisonment were substituted, together with periods of disqualification for each accused of 12 years.

At the coronial inquiry into the death of Pang Chor-ying, Annie (CCDI 1242/2005), a three-week inquest was conducted into the death of a former model. That was after the coroner had declined to hold an inquest, but was directed to do so in the public interest by the Court of First Instance, following an application by the Secretary for Justice. The skeletal remains of the deceased were found at the flat of a solicitor with whom she had been friendly, some four years after she was last seen alive. The coroner instructed the jury that the evidence did not support a verdict of either murder or suicide, and the jurors returned a verdict of death by accident or misadventure, resulting from either a drug overdose or choking on vomit.

In HKSAR v Tsoi Ho-ming and Another (HCCC 238/2006), two teenagers were charged with murder. The prosecution case was that they were members of a gang which beat and killed a 16-year-old schoolboy from a rival gang. The accused inflicted fatal injuries on the victim with water-pipes, and he died of massive head injuries after a fight between two gangs in Fanling following a dispute at a 7-Eleven store. After the jury convicted the accused instead of the lesser offence of manslaughter, the judge said the offence was a particularly bad case of its type, and the attack was both savage and merciless. The accused were imprisoned for, respectively, seven years and six years.

In HKSAR v Luo Xian-ping [2007] 3 HKLRD 203, the accused appealed against his conviction for rape. Whereas the complainant alleged that she was compelled to have sexual intercourse with the accused following a struggle, he testified that she agreed to what occurred for financial reward, but that when she increased the amount he desisted. Although recklessness was not raised by either the prosecution or defence, the judge gave a full direction on recklessness as a possible basis for convicting the accused of rape. The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction as the recklessness direction had no evidential foundation and the jury were left having to guess what might have been the proper basis for such a verdict. By raising the issue when he did, the judge had opened up a new route to conviction at a stage when it was too late for trial counsel to do anything about it.

In HKSAR v Chau Chun-tat and Another (DCCC 963/2006), the accused were convicted of false imprisonment, assault occasioning actual bodily harm and indecent assault. The prosecution case was that they falsely imprisoned a schoolgirl who had gone to their flat in Tin Shui Wai for a party, and then tortured her by beating and stripping her, and forcing her to snort washing powder. The judge said he believed that the 10-hour ordeal was designed to compel the victim, who was young and innocent, to become a prostitute, and heavy sentences were essential. The accused were imprisoned for, respectively, 4½years and 3½years.

In HKSAR v Poon Kam-shing (DCCC 175/2006), a fish hawker was convicted of blackmail. The evidence showed that he incurred debts upon which he had to pay $5,000 a week in interest to loan sharks, and that he threatened to inject a company's drinks with poison if he was not given $1 million. After a police operation he was arrested when he went to collect the money from a rubbish bin, and was found to have in his possession a syringe and a device to distort his voice when he made his demands by mobile phone. The judge said the seriousness of the offence required a deterrent sentence, and imposed 6½years' imprisonment.

Civil

Constitutional and administrative law

In Leung TC William Roy v Secretary for Justice, the applicant sought declaratory relief against the provisions of the Crimes Ordinance (Cap 200) which prohibit both buggery and acts of gross indecency with or by a man under the age of 21. The Court of First Instance (CFI), in granting the declarations sought by the applicant, held that under the Basic Law, the Court has jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief on the validity of primary legislation to those who say their fundamental rights have been undermined by the legislation. The Government's subsequent appeal against the CFI's judgment was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 20 September 2006.

In Julita Raza and nine others v The Chief Executive in Council and two others, the CFI on 4 January 2005 dismissed an application for judicial review against the decisions of the Chief Executive in Council that, with effect from 1 April 2003, the minimum allowable wage for foreign domestic helpers be reduced by $400 and that, as the scheme of foreign domestic helpers is a labour importation scheme under section 14 of the Employees Retraining Ordinance (Cap 423), with effect from 1 October 2003, a levy of $400 per month be imposed on their employers upon application for, or renewal of, contracts. The applicants' appeal to the Court of Appeal was also dismissed on 19 July 2006.

The CFI in Leung Kwok Hung and Koo Sze Yiu v Chief Executive of HKSAR, by its judgment dated 9 February 2006, declared that section 33 of the Telecommunications Ordinance (Cap 106) and the Law Enforcement (Covert Surveillance Procedure) Order issued by the Chief Executive to law enforcement agencies in respect of covert surveillance were unconstitutional, but made an order according temporary validity to section 33 and the Executive Order for six months to enable the Government to enact fresh legislation with sufficient safeguards for the right to privacy. On appeal to the CFA, the Court on 12 July 2006 set aside the temporary validity order and, in its place, substituted an order suspending the declarations of unconstitutionality for six months.

A challenge to the restriction on the right of Legislative Council members to participate in the enacting process concerning amendments to a Bill which have a charging effect on the revenue was rejected by the CFI on 22 January 2007. In Leung Kwok Hung v the President of the Legislative Counsel of the HKSAR and Secretary for Justice, the CFI held that any power to propose amendments when Bills are before the Legislative Council is a matter independent of the scope of Article 74 of the Basic Law, and that Rule 57(6) of the Rules of Procedure of the Legislative Council was not rendered inconsistent with the Basic Law by the application of Article 74.

In Democratic Party v Secretary for Justice, where a declaration was sought on the constitutionality of section 98 of the Companies Ordinance (Cap 32) which requires a company's register of members to be open for public inspection, the CFI by its judgment dated 21 May 2007 refused to grant the declaration. The Court recognised that the requirement under section 98 struck a fair balance between the demands of the legitimate interests of Hong Kong society, particularly in the commercial and financial sphere, and the requirement for the protection of individual freedom of members of a political party registered as a company.

Insider dealing and market misconduct

In Koon Wing Yee v Insider Dealing Tribunal and Financial Secretary and Chan Kin Shing Sonny v Insider Dealing Tribunal and Financial Secretary, the parties found to have been guilty of insider dealing by the Insider Dealing Tribunal (IDT) succeeded in their appeals to the Court of Appeal on the grounds that proceedings before the IDT are criminal in nature, and accordingly Articles 10 and 11 of Hong Kong Bill of Rights are engaged so that evidence obtained under compulsion is inadmissible and the criminal standard of proof applies to IDT proceedings. Leave has been granted to the Financial Secretary to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal and the appeals are due to be heard in February 2008.

Revenue

In Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Hong Kong International Terminals Limited and Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Tai Hing Cotton Mill (Development) Limited, the CFA allowed appeals by the Commissioner against decisions of the CA. The judgments provide important guidance on the application of the anti-tax avoidance provisions in section 61A of the Inland Revenue Ordinance (Cap 112).

Competition law

In PCCW-HKT Telephone Limited v Telecommunications Authority (HCAL 112/06), the CFI upheld the actions of the Telecommunications Authority in relation to possible changes in the regulatory framework governing charges for connection between fixed line and mobile telephones. In February 2007 the CFI dismissed the Applicant's claim for judicial review. A subsequent appeal by the Applicant was dismissed by the Court of Appeal in September 2007.

In PCCW-HKT Telephone Limited v Telecommunications Authority (HCAL 6/07), the CFI upheld a direction by the Telecommunications Authority directing the Applicant and Wharf T&T Limited to allow interconnection to a specified number block allocated to Zone Limited. In May 2007 the CFI dismissed the Applicant's application for judicial review. An appeal by the Applicant to the Court of Appeal is due to be heard in 2008.

Land

In Harvest Good Development Limited v Secretary for Justice and two others, the constitutionality of sections 7(2) and 17 of the Limitation Ordinance (Cap 347) was challenged on the ground that they are inconsistent with the rights of private ownership guaranteed by Articles 6 and 105 of the Basic Law. The CFI dismissed this judicial review application on 16 July 2007. The Applicant has appealed against the CFI's judgment.

Heritage

In Chu Hoi Dick and Ho Loy v Secretary for Home Affairs, a judicial review application was taken out by the two Applicants against the decision of the then Secretary for Home Affairs of 22 May 2007 not to declare the Queen's Pier a monument under the Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap 53). The CFI dismissed the judicial review application on 10 August 2007.

Town planning

In International Trader Limited v Town Planning Appeal Board and Town Planning Board, a judicial review application was taken out by the Applicant (a company of the Swire Group) against the decision of the Town Planning Appeal Board which dismissed the Applicant's appeal against the decision of the Town Planning Board not to approve the relaxation of the plot ratio and building height restrictions to facilitate a proposed comprehensive residential development at Seymour Road and Castle Steps in Mid Levels. The CFI allowed the judicial review application on 15 November 2007. The Town Planning Board has appealed against the CFI's judgment.

Building

In International Trader Limited v Appeal Tribunal (Buildings) and Building Authority, two judicial review applications were taken out by the same Applicant (a company of the Swire Group), against the decisions of the Appeal Tribunal (Buildings) in dismissing the Applicant's appeals against the decisions of the Building Authority in rejecting their proposed general building plans for a site at Castle Steps in the Mid-levels that straddles a Residential (Group C) zone and a Residential (Group A) zone. The CFI dismissed the first judicial review application on 21 April 2006 and the second judicial review application on 11 December 2007.

Ongoing cases

A number of claimants under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) challenged the power of the Director of Immigration to detain them pending the assessment of their CAT claims. In dismissing the application on 15 June 2007, the CFI held that the lodging of CAT claims does not invalidate orders of deportation or removal and that detention pursuant to such orders remains valid. The applicants have lodged an appeal against the CFI's judgment. Two other sets of judicial review proceedings were brought by CAT claimants arguing that the Director is in breach of his obligation under customary international law to conduct an independent investigation of their claimed refugee status, and that by not permitting legal representation to all CAT interviews and screening processes, the Government is in breach of its duty to assess CAT claims in accordance with the proper standard of fairness. Some of these cases were heard by the CFI in December 2007, with the remainder expected to be heard sometime in April 2008.

The Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong challenged as unconstitutional the 2004 amendments to the Education Ordinance (Cap 279) concerning the establishment of incorporated management committees insofar as they are applicable to aided primary and secondary schools run by the Diocese. On 23 November 2006, the CFI dismissed the application for judicial review and confirmed that the amendments are not inconsistent with the provisions under the Basic Law which protect the right of educational institutions to retain their autonomy and the right of religious organisations to run schools according to their previous practice. The applicant's appeal will be heard by the Court of Appeal on 13-14 March 2008.

In Chan Noi Heung & ors v Chief Executive of HKSAR, the applicants argued that the decision of the Chief Executive in Council not to implement or enforce the Trade Boards Ordinance (Cap 63) to fix minimum rates of wages was in contravention of a constitutional duty under the Basic Law as regards implementation of laws in the HKSAR. On 16 May 2007, the CFI held that, upon a true construction of the Ordinance, the power vested in the Chief Executive in Council to fix minimum rates of wages is a discretion which is to be employed only when the Chief Executive in Council considers it appropriate to do so, and there was no duty to exercise the discretion if the Chief Executive in Council was of the opinion that other measures, including extra-legislative measures, were to be preferred. The applicants have lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal and the hearing has been fixed for 17-18 April 2008.

The Secretary for Justice, in his capacity as protector of charities, has been joined as a party to ongoing probate, proceedings - Chinachem Charitable Foundation Limited v Chan Chun Chuen and others - relating to the estate of the late Nina Wang.

People

Mr Robert Allcock retired as Solicitor General in January 2007 and was awarded the Silver Bauhinia Star in July 2007.

Mr Tony Yen retired from his post as Law Draftsman in March 2007 after 40 years of dedicated service in the Government. Mr Eamonn Moran, PSM, QC, will join the department as the new Law Draftsman in January 2008.

Mr Grenville Cross, SC, Director of Public Prosecutions, was elected to the Executive Committee of the International Association of Prosecutors in September 2007.

Dr Alain Sham, Senior Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, was elected as Honorary Secretary of the Hong Kong Society of Experts in October 2007.

In November 2006, Miss Susie Ho joined the department as Director of Administration and Development, replacing Miss Annie Tam.

The Department's Links with other Jurisdictions

Information source: Departmental Review - "Department of Justice 2008"

Hong Kong's legal system has the same roots and applies many of the same principles as other common law systems around the world. Just as lawyers in Hong Kong refer to case law from jurisdictions from Singapore to South Africa, so decisions of Hong Kong's courts can assist lawyers researching overseas.

Since 1997, Hong Kong's status as a Special Administrative Region of the PRC has meant that, in addition to continuing to foster strong links with the common law world, mutual understanding with the Mainland of our two legal systems is also important.

The sharing of experience with lawyers in other jurisdictions plays an important role in legal life, a fact reflected in the composition of Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal, which at every full hearing has included one judge from another common law jurisdiction.

Visits

The Secretary for Justice and the Law Officers regularly meet visitors from the Mainland and overseas, both lawyers and non-lawyers. The Secretary for Justice personally met 31 visitors or delegations from overseas and 27 from the Mainland during 2006 and 2007. These visitors included judges from the Supreme People's Court of the PRC, the Higher People's Court of Guangdong and the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea, public prosecutors from the Mainland and from Australia, Denmark, England and Malaysia, legislators from Germany, Japan, Korea, the United Kingdom and the USA, and counterparts from the Department of Treaties and Law of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the PRC and various Bureaus and Departments of Justice from the Mainland. Other visitors received by the Secretary for Justice included the President and Secretary-General of the International Association of Prosecutors, the Chairman of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, the Chairman of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, the Chairman of the Bar Council of England and Wales, the President of the San Francisco Bar Association, the Minister of Justice of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and the then Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor of the United Kingdom.

Members of the department gave briefings on Hong Kong's legal system to many distinguished visitors from the Mainland and overseas, including lawyers, legislators, journalists and consular officials.

The Secretary for Justice and the Law Officers themselves from time to time visit their counterparts or undertake duties in other jurisdictions. For instance, in April 2006 and September 2007, the Secretary for Justice met officials from the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme People's Court, the Basic Law Committee of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress and other departments in Beijing to discuss measures to further enhance legal services co-operation between Hong Kong and the Mainland. During 2006 and 2007, the Secretary for Justice visited Dublin, Helsinki, London, New York, San Francisco, Stockholm and Washington DC, meeting senior government officials, legal practitioners and important contacts in each jurisdiction. In March 2006, the Solicitor General was a member of Hong Kong's delegation at the United Nations Human Rights Committee's hearing of Hong Kong's report under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Conferences and seminars in the Mainland and overseas

The Secretary for Justice and the Law Officers also regularly attend conferences and seminars in the Mainland or overseas to keep abreast of legal developments and law reform in other jurisdictions and to learn from the experience of others.

In April 2007, the Secretary for Justice and the Director of Public Prosecutions attended the 4th China-ASEAN Prosecutors-General Conference in Macao. In September 2007, the Secretary for Justice attended the 7th Chinese Lawyers' Forum in Ningxia.

In 2006 and 2007, the Director of Public Prosecutions attended a number of important international conferences, including the 1st conference of the International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities in Beijing and the 11th Annual Conference of the International Association of Prosecutors in Paris.

Other major international conferences attended by counsel of the department during 2006 and 2007 included the 11th and 12th Annual Conferences of the International Association of Prosecutors in Paris and Hong Kong respectively, the 20th Biennial LawAsia Conference in Hong Kong, the 2006 and 2007 International Bar Association Conferences in Chicago and Singapore respectively, the 3rd and 4th Asia and Pacific Regional Conferences of the International Association of Prosecutors in Macao and Kuala Lumpur respectively, the 11th World Conference of the Asia Crime Prevention Foundation in Jakarta, the 15th Commonwealth Law Conference in Nairobi, and the International Forfeiture Cooperation Conference in Davos.

During 2006 and 2007, counsel also attended a range of workshops and training seminars overseas. Subjects covered included dispute settlement, advanced loan documentation, public-private partnerships and economic crime. In September 2007, the Acting Law Draftsman and Acting Deputy Law Draftsman attended the Commonwealth Association of Legislative Counsel Conference in Nairobi. These various opportunities enable the department to benefit from the experience of other jurisdictions.

Day-to-day links with other jurisdictions

While the majority of lawyers in the department have completed their legal qualifications in Hong Kong, some have qualified in overseas jurisdictions, including Australia, England and New Zealand. In addition to this in-house experience of other jurisdictions, every counsel has online access to the wealth of legal resources from around the world available via the internet. Email communication enables counsel to communicate with lawyers in other jurisdictions quickly and efficiently. The department receives on a regular reciprocal basis reports and papers from law reform agencies and other legal bodies around the world. The department also makes use of the Commonwealth Legal Advisory Service when researching aspects of comparative law, in addition to the regular contacts which members of the department maintain with their counterparts overseas.