Page 257 of 382
492
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
to the newspapers. The Umelco, I understand, do not deal with complaints but simply pass them on to the department concerned. Urban Councillors can only deal with matters within the jurisdiction of the Urban Council. When dealing with matters outside their scope they likewise have to pass the matters on to the relevant departments and to leave matters to them to follow up.
This inability on the part of the public to take further steps to redress wrongs or grievances or even to get a satisfactory reply involving a more painstaking inquiry has in many cases led to abuse of authority.
I quote a glaring example in the prosecution for traffic offences.
Sometime in March this year I represented a driver charged with careless driving for overtaking at Causeway Bay near Moreton Terrace on the Hong Kong island. The cross-examination of the star witness, who was a traffic inspector, revealed that he was on duty there for only half an hour during which time he had taken down the numbers of 35 cars for overtaking in an identical manner. A number of the 35 cases had already been prosecuted, most of them with success and it was his intention to prosecute all and in each case to give identical evidence. On my request he produced his notebook which showed nothing but the nature of the offence followed by the registration numbers of 35 vehicles. He admitted that he wrote down the model offence in his notebook the moment he arrived at the scene and then took down the numbers of 35 cars in barely 30 minutes. He admitted he had no records to show where the particulars of overtaking differ and had to give identical evidence in each case.
I read out the main part of his model evidence given in Court as follows:-
"At 5.30 p.m. 5.12.64 I was on duty in uniform standing east of the tram island in Causeway Bay Road almost opposite to Shelter Street. I was facing two lines of westbound traffic. It was peak period. The vehicles in the two lines were travelling bumper to bumper at a slow speed. I saw a vehicle pull out from the offside of the two lines over 200 yards east of where I was standing and overtake the other traffic by driving along the tram lines and the centre white line. On reaching a point between Moreton Terrace and Shelter Street, this vehicle trying to rejoin the offside of the two lines of traffic, caused the nearest vehicle in that line to brake violently to a halt which resulted in all the vehicles behind it also coming to a halt. I noted the number of the vehicle which caused this. It was car No. I pointed to the driver to indicate that I had noted the number. But I did not stop the car because that would have caused further delay and inconvenience to other traffic.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
493
On my return to the Traffic Office I applied for a summons against the driver."
In the course of hearing it turned out that it was the Defendant's car that was overtaken and the driver was duly acquitted.
This way of summonsing 35 drivers for offences alleged to have all happened in half an hour without any record in support except for the model offence framed beforehand can only be described as shocking. It is clearly a case of deliberate falsehood and cannot be excused as a genuine mistake. I took the matter up with the Commissioner of Police enclosing a certified copy of the notes of the proceedings and asked that in view of the obvious unreliability of the evidence of the police officer that all further prosecutions be stopped and that all cases that have been dealt with be reviewed.
I also wrote to the Attorney General's Department on the matter. But for all the trouble that I took the answer that I received in each case was that as the Magistrate did not reprimand the officer, they were not prepared to accept that the officer was deliberately giving false evidence and the matter rested there.
I am sure no one can be satisfied with this answer and the only answer to such abuse of authority and faulty administration is the appointment of an ombudsman for Hong Kong. Human failings are such that if left to themselves they are bound to get spoilt and inefficient. To maintain a high standard of administration and to give redress to the public for wrongs committed it is time to consider seriously the appointment of an ombudsman. I now make public the papers and correspondence exchanged between me and the departments concerned relating to the complaint in question and I table them.
The idea of an ombudsman is not new in Chinese history. In olden days there was the Yue Shih, who acted as a sort of imperial censor. Some years after the 1911 Chinese Republic was established, the Control Yuen—which was a form of Watch-dog Committee—came into being. Even in Hong Kong, most Chinese voluntary Societies still maintain a watch-dog committee called "Kam Sze Wui" to keep an eye on the work of the executive committee.
The purpose of an ombudsman is similar to that of a grievance man but in his inquiries he has the very important right of access to departmental records. His function is not only to protect the public against faulty administration but also government servants against unjust accusation by members of the public.
Next I propose to deal with the problems of multi-storey buildings.
Page 257 of 382