LEGCO WORK

Motion on “Judicial Officers (Extension of Retirement Age) (Amendment) Bill 2019” (2019.11.07)

MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): President, the main purpose of the Judicial Officers (Extension of Retirement Age) (Amendment) Bill 2019 (“the Bill”), which is under consideration today, is to extend the statutory retirement ages for Judges and Judicial Officers and provide for the relevant arrangements. The Judiciary points out that the Court of First Instance (“CFI”) of the High Court has been persistently facing recruitment difficulties. Therefore, it is necessary to extend the statutory retirement age for Judges of the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”) of the High Court and at levels above it from 65 to 70, while setting the statutory retirement age for Judges at levels below CFA of the High Court at 65. Moreover, the discretionary retirement arrangements will be maintained. Under the new arrangements, the maximum retirement age for Judges of CFA is 76 and that for Judges of CFI and the Court of Appeal (“CA”) is 75. And the maximum retirement age for other Judges is 70.

On the surface, we should support the Bill because it can retain veteran Judges with ample experience, as well as attracting experienced and outstanding legal professionals to the rank of Judges. In fact, it takes a long time to nurture a Judge, who must have broad and profound legal knowledge and abundant judicial experience. Therefore, virtuous and respectable Judges are absolutely important assets of society. At the same time, with the increasing longevity of humans, it is a global trend to extend retirement age. Therefore, insofar as working ability is concerned, there are indeed sufficient grounds for extending the retirement age of Judges.

However, as Members of the Legislative Council, on this question of whether to lend support to the extension of the retirement ages for Judges and Judicial Officers and the relevant arrangements, we actually have to consider the views and opinions of Hong Kong citizens about the Court and Judges.

The prevalent social unrest has severely undermined many core values of Hong Kong, including compliance with the law, tolerance and courtesy, which were held in esteem before. Now what is left is only the rule of law, which is the most important core value and one that we absolutely have to safeguard. To convince people that the rule of law still prevails in Hong Kong, we wish to express people’s misgivings about the Court and Judges in the hope that the authorities will listen to their views.

First, many people have the impression that “the Police arrest suspects while Judges release them”. Many suspects who appeared to have committed serious crimes and arrested on the spot would mostly be released on bail and then be brought to trial only after a long period of time.

Second, different sentences are handed down for similar crimes. Some offenders are sentenced to imprisonment and some are made to serve community service orders. Though I understand that the circumstances of every case are different, ordinary people would find dissimilar sentences imposed for similar crimes unacceptable. It is also one of the crucial criteria of determining if the Court and Judges are fair and impartial.

Third, 3 000-odd people have been arrested so far but only a few hundreds of them have been formally charged. People would then question: Why has the Court not adopted special measures, such as the establishment of a special court, to expedite the process? The Court lets cases pile up, causing injustice to the arrested, as they do not know when they can stand a fair trial. Pending trials, they feel scared and anxious and are under tremendous mental pressure. People ought to know that their families suffer too and are put under enormous strain. Let us imagine, if each arrested person has four family members―actually perhaps not only four―such as parents, grandparents, children …

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN Kin-por, please come back to the question of this debate.

MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): President, I beg your pardon?

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Mr CHAN, I consider your speech off topic. Please come back to the question of this debate.

MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): President, I am explaining the factors I consider in determining whether or not I should support the Bill. I think it is important.

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Please continue.

MR CHAN KIN-POR (in Cantonese): Perhaps can you please allow me some time to continue my explanation? It is the first time that I speak in this debate, is it not? I hope the President can understand that I am not beating about the bush but am trying to genuinely reflect people’s views. Moreover, if the Government cannot fully dispel the misgivings I have just stated, I may not support the Bill. Therefore, I consider myself responsible for clearly explaining to society which problems require handling first, before I indicate my support for the Bill.

Come to think about this, if each of the arrested persons has four family members, such as parents, grandparents and children, it means that―3 000 times five―15 000 people will feel distressed. Hence, why do so many people say Hong Kong is in such chaos now? Because at least 15 000 people feel distressed and are dissatisfied with the Government.

On the other hand, another group of people feel worried and anxious about the arrested not being brought to trials over a long period of time. If lawbreakers are not brought to trials and due penalties are not meted on them in a timely manner, it only makes people think that the Court is a “toothless tiger”. If the authorities continue to not take actions in this regard, such as setting up a special court to deal with the backlog of cases, Hong Kong citizens will definitely feel that justice is not done.

Fourth, can Judges strictly adhere to neutrality and impartiality? A Judge expressed named support for political activities, and judicial personnel also photographed their staff passes and posted them on social media in support of such political activities. Such conduct would only accentuate the negative impression people have of Judges and the judicial system. When Judges are considered to be not impartial and hold personal stances, people would thus be caused to lose confidence in them.

Fifth, as regards the legal aid system, many people are worried that the approval of legal aid applications is overly lax. Even cases with long odds of winning would be granted legal aid. It only gives people the impression that the party concerned is transferring benefits to the legal profession and creating a great amount of wealth for the legal profession using public funds. People thus feel enraged but cannot find any way to lodge complaints.

Hong Kong is a society that upholds the rule of law. People very much respect the judgments handed down by the Court. If people consider that Judges are unfair, partial and biased in the discharge of their duties, the last pillar of Hong Kong will be completely demolished. For this reason, the Court of Hong Kong is duty-bound to prove to people that it gives no regard to politics and definitely conducts trials and passes sentences in strict compliance with the laws of Hong Kong. Also, Judges definitely do not practise favouritism. Many young people once held the misconception of achieving justice by violating the law and thought that so long as they were doing what they considered just, they could break the law without being sanctioned. Fortunately, the Court has earlier made a clear point that achieving justice by violating the law cannot be a defence of criminal charges. The law is violated when it is broken. Therefore, I consider gate-keeping by the Court very important.

Why do I think that my speech made just now is relevant, even crucially relevant, to the Bill? Because if the Court fails to properly perform its duty as a gatekeeper to meet people’s expectations and if people have no confidence in the Court, why should the retirement age for Judges be extended? Why not let some Judges retire as soon as possible and then recruit and train some others who are better?

President, I am very grateful for your indulgence, but I will finish speaking very soon. The law is violated when it is broken. The gate-keeping role of the Court is crucial. It has to rectify many false ideologies prevailing in society in a timely manner. In particular, to some people from a legal background who have presented incorrect points of law, their mistakes should be pointed out to them and they should be reprimanded straight as soon as possible. Moreover, the Court has to conduct trials on unlawful acts as soon as possible and pass judgments and sentences on the basis of highly transparent and uniform criteria so as to maintain people’s confidence in the rule of law in Hong Kong. Only by doing so can the extension of the retirement age for Judges, which is under discussion now, be meaningful and merit our support. Thank you, President.

Scroll to Top