HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
27
a date, thus affording, upon publication of the Bill, ample opportunity for its consideration and review, both by this Council and by the public.
THE COLONIAL SECRETARY seconded, and the Bill was read a First time.
Objects and Reasons.
The "Objects and Reasons" for the Bill were stated as follows:-
1. Shortly before the Pacific War, it was decided to recruit magistrates from among legally qualified men instead of from the administrative service. This decision has now been almost fully implemented so that apart from offences under the Merchant Shipping Ordinance and petty cases in the New Territories, all offences triable by a magistrate are dealt with by legally qualified men.
2. The Magistrates Ordinance, 1982, is based on the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1848, which is operated in England principally though by no means exclusively by lay justices. What is perhaps of more importance is that in England by means of Quarter Sessions there is machinery for the trial of a large number of criminal cases without requiring in first instance, the intervention of a judge. Moreover, the particular form of Quarter Sessions known as borough sessions are held by a Recorder who is the sole judge of the Court and this is becoming the rule in cities and large urban districts.
3. Most Colonies have found it necessary in the administration of justice either to depart from the system prevailing in the United Kingdom or at all events to constitute some tribunal for the trial of criminal cases which has greater jurisdiction and powers than Justices under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts in the United Kingdom and less jurisdiction and powers than a Judge of the High Court.
In Hong Kong, the expedient, adopted immediately prior to the Pacific War, of increasing the powers of magistrates was, after the restoration of Civil Government, confirmed by an Ordinance (No. 5 of 1946) which permits such increased powers being exercised by a magistrate certified by the Chief Justice to possess the necessary legal qualifications and experience for the exercise of such powers.
measure,
4. Although this measure was originally passed as an emergency its utility since the return of Civil Government has been demonstrated by the fact that increased Powers were resorted to by magistrates in a vast numbers of cases, all of which would otherwise have had to be tried by an already over-burdened Supreme Court or been inadequately punished. It is perhaps significant that despite the trial of these more important cases by magistrates there have been very few successful appeals against sentence since the restoration of Civil Government.
5. Another defect in the principal Ordinance, which came to light when it was recently desired to appoint magistrates purely for the purpose of hearing tenancy cases is that there is no power to appoint magistrates by warrant and in this way, limit the jurisdiction
160