}
pending examination under the screening process for residence at an open centre which is also a place of
detention."
43.
Mr Justice Jones rejected this argument at p.331J-332C:-
"I am quite satisfied that the Director is not required to exercise a discretion under S.13D(1) whether or not to detain Vietnamese who arrive in Hong Kong from Vietnam. Having regard to the policy expressed by Government, the legislature clearly intended that all Vietnamese boat people should be detained immediately upon their arrival. From a practical point of view, the authorities would be faced with an almost impossible task if they had to interview each person upon arrival as to his or her individual circumstances before a decision to detain was
made. For a detention order to be made, it is only necessary to establish that a person is a resident or former resident of Vietnam without a valid travel
document. It has been the practice for several years to detain all Vietnamese boat people initially at the Green Island Reception Centre or at one of the substitute reception centres for the purposes of interview, registration and port health clearance. Not only is the procedure well known to the Director and the other Government departments concerned with the control of Vietnamese boat people but they are also aware that the detention there will be temporary before each person is
transferred to another place of detention. The power to specify a place is plainly directory".
44. This case although decided in May 1991 has never been taken to an appeal hearing. Appeal hearings in Hong Kong lie to the Court of Appeal in Hong Kong and from there there lies an appeal to the Privy Council in London. The Privy Council is in the same position for the Hong Kong legal system as the House of Lords is to the United Kingdom jurisdictions and has,
Arb.Det