Symposium on Y2K Legal Issues
8 November 1999
Opening Address by
The Hon. Elsie Leung Oi-sie, JP
Secretary for Justice

		Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.  I am honoured to be invited to give this opening address today.

		I am sure that many of you have attended previous talks about the Y2K problem and the risk it poses.  It is beyond doubt that the Y2K problem is very real, has in some cases been very difficult to detect and in many cases has been very expensive and time consuming to remedy.  There have been widely varying estimates about the severity of the consequences if governments, industries and businesses do not adequately deal with this problem.

		It is also now beyond doubt that the potential for risk does in fact depend very much on the consequences that could follow from the failure of critical computer systems.  Having been awakened to the seriousness of the Y2K problem, responsible organizations should by now have completed or nearly completed their rectification projects or have contingency plans in place should their computer systems fail.

		The Government, for its part, has expended much effort and money to ensure that its own house is in order.  As at 25 October 1999, all Government's mission-critical computers and embedded systems had been confirmed to be Y2K compliant or rectified.  Contingency plans are also in place to ensure that essential services to the public will not be disrupted.
 
		Compared to the very large IT systems within other Government Departments, the Department of Justice has had an easier task in identifying and rectifying its Y2K problem. Even so, we have had to spend millions of dollars in upgrading the software and hardware for over 20 different systems, including our basic network operating system, e-mail system and document management system.

		In the event of any failure in the computer systems of the Department of Justice, probably the greatest impact would be on internal communication.  Our computers have also been used for recording hearing dates, debts owed to the Government and repayment dates, time limits for taking legal action and enforcing judgements.  However, I am glad to inform you that the Department of Justice has already completed the rectification projects, and contingency plans are in place.

		During the analysis stage of our Department’s Y2K preparations, we discovered that many of our major ‘package’ software systems that were installed in 1994-96 were not Y2K compliant. The existence of the Y2K problem had been identified well before those years and we were perhaps naïve at that time to expect that the major software suppliers would have had dealt with the matter.  

		The Government in 1996 began to add provisions in its IT contracts to require Y2K compliance.  However, in the case of packaged software this was not always practicable, because the products we needed were simply not yet available in Y2K compliant form.  We either had to accept products which were not Y2K compliant and rely on non-binding assurances from the suppliers that they would have upgrades and patches in time for installation before 1 January 2000, or to delay our projects.  It was fortunate that the major software suppliers have provided the upgrades or patches, but at extra effort and expenses to the customers.

		The Government has also taken steps to alert organizations in Hong Kong of the need to examine their technology environments for any potential Y2K problem and take remedial action if necessary.  Our Year 2000 Web site provides much useful information about the Y2K problem and links to other Web sites around the world. 

		The Government has included non-government organizations in its Y2K monitoring programme to help ensure that the essential services provided by them will not be interrupted.

		9 September 1999 has been generally considered to be one of the critical dates for the smooth transition of computer systems to year 2000.  For the rollover to 9 September, the Government had set up a Central Co-ordinating Centre (CCC) to monitor the territory-wide situation, to co-ordinate cross-sector emergency responses to Y2K-induced incidents, as well as to collect, collate and disseminate information.  We are glad that the CCC had not received any reports on Y2K-induced incidents.  The experience gained from the operation on 9 September would help the Government and all concerned to set up an effective monitoring and co-ordinating mechanism during the rollover to the new millennium.

		The Government has already done a lot to prepare for Y2K, and will continue with its endeavour.  However, that still cannot exclude the possibility of unexpected incidents occurring, and we have to remain on guard.

	That there will be litigation arising from the Y2K problem is no longer in doubt.  In the United States, some companies have already brought lawsuits against their insurance companies, claiming the costs of rectification arising from the Y2K problem. 

	Some people take that view that the disputes which could be caused by Y2K are very unusual, unprecedented and widespread, and therefore it is necessary to consider legislating.  On 16 July this year, the Legislative Council held a debate on a motion in respect of the Y2K problem.  In this motion, it was proposed, among other things, that the Administration should study whether it was necessary to introduce legislation on the legal responsibilities arising from Y2K.

	The Administration has already given careful consideration to this issue and takes the view that it is unnecessary to introduce legislation.  In principle, the commercial disputes arising from Y2K would not be substantially different from disputes arising from other commercial transactions, and could be dealt with according to the existing legal principles.  If new specific legislation were to be enacted to provide for legal responsibilities, the legislation certainly would involve a lot of controversies and complex elements.  Much discussion and consultation would also be necessary.  Legislation is therefore unlikely to provide any solution within a short period of time.  On the contrary, during the legislative process, some people, or even most people, would most probably direct their efforts towards studying how to protect their own interests or evade responsibilities under the new law, instead of dealing with the Y2K problem.

	From the result of voting in the Legislative Council on 16 July, we understand that a majority of the Legislative Councillors also took the view that it was not necessary to consider legislating for the Y2K problem.

	The applications of existing legal principles, including those in relation to contract, tort and insurance, to the Y2K problem would of course involve some challenging and interesting issues.  The symposium today will be addressing legal issues which may arise if the Y2K problem causes actual damage.  These include:

1.	Does anyone have a legal responsibility to compensate for the damage?

	2.	At this late date can one still do anything to prepare for the potential legal rights and liabilities, if any?

	3.	As for persons in the middle of the “technology chain”, would they become potential plaintiffs, or potential defendants, or both?

	The topics to be discussed today also include “alternative dispute resolution” which operates outside the traditional judicial system.  While I of course have full faith in the competence of our judiciary to handle complex issues, parties concerned may prefer to use “alternative dispute resolution” forums such as mediation or arbitration.  These are fair, quick and cost-effective means of dispute resolution.  The use of these means should be encouraged.  As far as I know, many information technology contracts, including those in use in Hong Kong, have already contained provisions requiring the parties concerned to resort first to these means of dispute resolution when disputes take place.

	I believe that when any person first hears about Y2K, it is quite difficult to understand why the omission of two numerals from computer programmes could cause widespread confusion, losses or even catastrophe, and why, at the stroke of midnight at the end of this year, our calendars would suddenly flip back a century to 1900.  This sounds more like science fiction than science. Nevertheless, we certainly cannot treat this problem as science fiction, and all of us should prepare well for it.

	Last but not least, I wish all participants in this symposium a day filled with useful information and ideas.  I wish this symposium every success.