NOTE
ON
JUSTICE (HONG KONG BRANCH)
REPORT ON HONG KONG PUBLIC ORDER
ORDINANCE.
42/21/1
It would, I think, be helpful to number the paragraphs of this Report, to make references to it more easy to follow. I have therefore
numbered them from 1 to 58.
Paragraphs 1 and 2. I appreciate the force of the argument that
"self-imposed limitations" should be looked at with some reserve. The
difficulty which arises in much criminal legislation is that it is not always
possible to devise a form of words which will embrace the real offender,
against whom it is primarily directed, without catching minor offenders whose
degree of "moral guilt" is far lower.
Experience in Hong Kong since 1956 has persuaded the government
that it is essential to confer on the police powers which will control public
meetings in a way which is unnecessary in countries where crowds do not so
readily become violent mobs. Our crowded urban conditions make control of
rioters a matter of extreme difficulty and there is a real danger that, as
soon as a riot starts in earnest, it will be joined by triad, hooligan and
disgruntled people and spread quickly throughout the urban areas.
I am sure that the members of Justice are as aware of these consi-
derations, though it is perhaps natural that the government, on whom rests
the responsibility for ensuring that crowds do not become dangerous, should
place a greater emphasis on the need to control them that the writers, who
look at the problem from the viewpoint of members of the public who are them-
selves law-abiding and unlikely to be involved in such disorders.
Paragraph 3. I appreciate the argument about the desirability of
requiring "mens rea". There are, however, instances where a reference to
guilty knowledge is superfluous or casts a burden on the prosecution which
may result in persons being unreasonably acquitted. As so often, there is
a balance to be struck between the community's needs and those of the indi-
vidual. This problem will be referred to again when dealing with paragraphs
commenting on the various sections.
Paragraph 4. I do not think that courts of law need worry about
applying for licences, since they fall within paragraphs (e) and (f) of the
definition of "public body" in the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance.