WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1979
LAY
5
BILL TO TIGHTEN BAILING PROCEDURES BECOMES LAW
*****
THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (AMENDMENT) (NO. 4) BILL, WHICH PROPOSES TO TIGHTEN UP THE EXISTING LAW ON THE GRANTING OF BAIL, HAS RECEIVED THE SUPPORT OF A LEGISLATION SCRUTINY GROUP OF UNOFFICIAL MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AFTER CAREFUL STUDY AND DISCUSSION OF ITS PROVISIONS WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
THE GROUP'S CONVENER, THE HON, T.S. LO, SPEAKING AT THE RESUMED DEBATE ON THE BILL TODAY (WEDNESDAY) SAID HOWEVER THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF POINTS WHICH HE FELT WARRANTED FURTHER ELABORATION.
THE FIRST POINT CONCERNED THE STATEMENT MADE BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WHEN HE MOVED THE SECOND READING, THAT AN ACCUSED PERSON WHO IS REFUSED BAIL HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO APPLY TO THE HIGH COURT FOR A REVIEW AND IS ABLE TO APPLY TO ONE JUDGE AFTER ANOTHER
IF HE IS UNSUCCESSFUL. +
THIS, MR. LO SAID, DID NOT APPEAR TO BE THE POSITION AS LAID DOWN BY JUDGE LI IN WONG VS R IN 1976. +HOWEVER THERE IS NO HARM IN RESTATING THE LAW PARTICULARLY WHEN IN THE MINDS OF SOME DOUBT EXISTS, HE SAID,
SECONDLY, ON THE PROPOSED NEW SECTION 12B PROVIDING IN EFFECT THAT NO APPEAL SHOULD LIE FROM THE DECISION OF A COURT OR A JUDGE IF BAIL WAS REFUSED, MR. LO SAID THIS MIGHT SEEM ODD AT FIRST SIGHT, AS IT WAS ALWAYS POSSIBLE FOR A COURT OR A JUDGE TO GO WRONG ON A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE.
+HOWEVER THE LEGCO GROUP HAS BEEN PERSUADED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S ARGUMENT THAT AS BAIL IS ALWAYS DISCRETIONARY AND EACH CASE HAS TO BE CONSIDERED ON ITS OWN MERITS, THE QUESTION OF PRINCIPLES DOES NOT ARISE.+
THIRDLY, MR. LO SAID, THE LEGCO GROUP FELT IT WAS ESSENTIAL TO ENSURE THAT THE POWER OF APPLYING FOR REVIEW OF A BAIL ORDER WAS EXERCISED WITH GREAT CARE.
THEY CONSIDERED THAT IF POSSIBLE, SUCH POWER SHOULD BE EXERCISED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PERSONALLY, AND WERE TOLD THAT THEY WOULD BE GIVEN SUCH AN ASSURANCE.
FOURTHLY, THE GROUP FELT THAT IN CASES WHERE THE REVIEW OF A BAIL ORDER WAS THE RESULT OF THE FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO ADDUCE ALL THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT WHEN BAIL WAS FIRST APPLIED FOR, THE COURT SHOULD BE GIVEN THE DISCRETION TO AWARD COSTS AGAINST THE CROWN. THEY ALSO HAD AN ASSURANCE THAT AN AMENDMENT TO THIS EFFECT WOULD BE MOVED.
/LASTLY,
+