71.
In
In July 1993, information supplied by a third party
revealed that Mr VUONG's wife was in UK. This fact had never
been disclosed by Mr VUONG either to the UNHCR or the Hong Kong immigration authorities. It was later admitted by Mr VUONG that his wife had entered UK on a false identity. order to facilitate Mr VUONG's reunion with his wife and to
avoid any prolonged detention, immediate arrangements were made with the United Kingdom Government for his resettlement. Following the completion of resettlement formalities, Mr VUONG was released from detention and left Hong Kong on 14 October
1993 for the United Kingdom.
72. It was unfortunate that Mr VUONG was less than candid with the Hong Kong Government about the circumstances of his wife. It would not have been necessary to detain Mr VUONG for any prolonged period if he had provided the Hong Kong Government with the vital information that finally led to his
resettlement in the United Kingdom.
73.
Mr CAM was also an ECVII intercepted upon arrival in
1987. As at different points in time, Mr CAM reported different addresses in China, three submissions were passed to
the Chinese authorities for verification from 1987 to 1988 but
no reply was received. In July 1990, the Hong Kong Government made formal representations to the Chinese Government for the early return of Mr CAM. It was not until March 1991 that China finally confirmed their agreement for the return of Mr CAM but did not fix a date for his repatriation. In August 1991, Mr CAM took legal action against the Government for his prolonged detention. At the same time, he married a screened-out Vietnamese migrant. In late August 1991, the
3 September 1991 was set by China for Mr CAM to return but the
repatriation was deferred because of the legal action taken by
Mr CAM at the time. On 25 September 1991, Mr CAM's case was heard and dismissed by the High Court. He later applied for voluntary repatriation to Vietnam together with his wife but
Arb.Det