Hongkie Chief Justice Says Sinkie Kangaroo Courts Sacrifice Justice for "Efficiency"!

[Sammyboy RSS Feed]

An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:

...... and rightly points out that 70% daft Sinkies and PAP Gahbrament need to take courses in positive thinking! Bwahahahahaha!

Judicial reviews fundamental to rule of law in Hong Kong, says former top judge Andrew Li

Hong Kong's first chief justice after the 1997 handover, Andrew Li Kwok-nang, has defended the rising number of judicial reviews taking up officials' time as a positive outcome of good governance, pointing out that justice and convenience were "sometimes not on speaking terms".

Li, who presided over the judiciary from 1997 to 2010, maintained that the judiciary was in good shape and dismissed as unjustified recent criticism by a retired Court of Final Appeal judge that it had failed to meet contemporary needs.

In a robust defence of the judicial reviews that may inconvenience the authorities, he emphasised that the courts had an effective mechanism to stop any attempt to abuse the process.

Describing judicial reviews by an independent judiciary as "fundamental to the rule of law", Li urged that they not be viewed as a "nuisance" to government.

His remarks, in an article for today's Post, came two weeks after retired judge of the Court of Final Appeal Henry Litton hit out at what he described as the abuse of judicial reviews, singling out a former head of the University of Hong Kong's student union, Yvonne Leung Kai-kwok.

Leung's application for a judicial review to challenge the government's political reform package was rejected in June. Litton called it "simply grandstanding that should be roundly condemned", accusing Leung of hoping to put in her CV that she had sued the chief executive.

Li noted that, like Litton, he too was concerned about the rising number of judicial reviews.

But in an oblique criticism of Litton's comments, Li wrote: "I do not however think that attributing improper motives to the unsuccessful applicants in such cases would contribute to a constructive debate on this matter."

Li stressed that in 2007, the Court of Final Appeal raised the threshold for the granting of leave for judicial reviews. In a Court of Final Appeal judgment written by Li in that year, the test to be applied was that the court had to be satisfied there was a reasonably arguable case which enjoyed realistic prospects of success.

Other judges at the time agreed with the judgment, including Litton, who retired as a non-permanent judge of the top court in July.

"By applying this test, many challenges have been stopped in this way," Li wrote.

After the threshold was raised in 2007, fewer than half of judicial review applications were granted leave to proceed to full hearing from 2008 to 2013.

"But once the court grants permission for proceedings to commence, the judicial review challenge cannot be regarded as an abuse of the process," Li wrote. "Where a judicial review challenge has been allowed to proceed, this may well result in inconvenience to the public authority as it would involve time, expense and delay in the implementation of the decision under challenge.

"But under the rule of law, convenience and justice are sometimes not on speaking terms," Li wrote. "It would not be right to view judicial review negatively as a nuisance to government. On the contrary, it should be viewed positively."

Li said Litton's criticism that Hong Kong's judges were insufficiently robust in dealing with judicial review cases and the judiciary generally for losing its grasp on reality was unjustified.

"Judges must of course deal with cases with reasonable expedition," Li wrote, "But it must be strongly emphasised that the pursuit of efficiency must not be at the expense of justice."

Litton served as a permanent judge of the Court of Final Appeal from 1997 to 2000 before becoming a non-permanent judge of the Court of Final Appeal.

A former chairman of the Bar Association, Paul Shieh Wing-tai, said judicial reviews had in-built mechanisms against abuse. "I do not think that anyone in Hong Kong, including Mr Litton, had suggested that judicial review is a bad thing," Shieh said.

"Indeed its very existence is a good thing and marks Hong Kong from mainland China. It has room for improvement in that judges can be expected to be more robust in screening out undeserving cases, but very often judicial review applications take place against a polarised political background.

"In order that their decisions are not criticised (wrongly, and almost as a kneejerk) by interested parties as 'the death of the rule of law' (or evidencing "the judiciary turning red"), judges can be forgiven for spending more time and effort in demonstrating that the unsuccessful applicant has had a fair hearing and in explaining in greater detail why he or she has lost."

Bar Association chairwoman Winnie Tam Wan-chi agreed there was already an effective mechanism to stop any attempts to abuse judicial reviews.

"Where the public are concerned with the issues, a fully reasoned decision would only be good assurance of the fairness of the judicial process."

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/l...ng-says-former


Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com.