17
WEDNESDAY, JULY 9, 1986
IN ADDITION, THE COMMITTEE COULD PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO THOSE HARASSED BY TRIADS OR FORMER FELLOW GANG MEMBERS AFTER THE EXPIRY OF A SUPERVISION ORDER, HE SAID.
MR CHUNG SAID IT WAS UNACCEPTABLE THAT A PROPOSAL UNDER THE ORDER COULD INVOLVE A SPECIAL FORM OF CAUTION WHEN A PERSON BEING SUPERVISED WAS CHARGED WITH A SUBSEQUENT OFFENCE OR WAS QUESTIONED IN RELATION TO THAT OFFENCE AT A POLICE STATION.
HE POINTED OUT THAT THIS WOULD MAKE EXPLANATION OR PROVISION OF EVIDENCE TO THE CHARGE MANDATORY IN THE CASE OF A PERSON UNDER THE SUPERVISION ORDER,
+HIS RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT IS THUS INFRINGED, HE SAID,
FURTHERMORE, IF THE SPECIAL FORM OF CAUTION APPEARED IN THE SUSPECT'S STATEMENT, THE COURT WOULD BE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THE SUSPECT HAD A PREVIOUS CRIMINAL RECORD, WHICH WOULD BE GREATLY DISADVANTAGEOUS TO THE SUSPECT, HE SAID.
REFERRING TO CHANNELS FOR COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE POLICE, MR CHUNG SUGGESTED THAT ALL COMPLAINT CASES, WHETHER MINOR OR SERIOUS, SHOULD BE HANDLED BY THE COMPLAINTS AGAINST POLICE OFFICE ITSELF.
HE SAID IT WAS UNDESIRABLE TO REFER MINOR CASES TO A POLICE STATION WHERE THE POLICE OFFICER COMPLAINED AGAINST WORKED.
AS REGARDS THE GRAND JURY APPROACH, HE SAID ALTHOUGH THERE WAS MERIT IN THIS PROPOSAL, IT WOULD MEAN INFRINGEMENT UPON A WITNESS'S RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT, THUS CONTRADICTING THE TRADITIONAL PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE.
MR CHUNG CONSIDERED THAT THIS APPROACH SHOULD NOT BE ADOPTED AT THE PRESENT STAGE.
LASTLY, HE SAID THE PROPOSALS IN THE DOCUMENT WERE MAINLY STOP-GAP MEASURES AND THERE WERE FEW RADICAL SOLUTIONS.
J
IN HIS OPINION, TO ROOT OUT THE PROBLEM COMPLETELY THE POLICE, SCHOOLS AND SOCIAL WORKERS SHOULD WORK CLOSELY WITH ONE ANOTHER TO ELIMINATE AND PREVENT TRIAD MEMBERS FROM PENETRATING SCHOOLS, AND MORE EFFECTIVE METHODS SHOULD BE EMPLOYED IN ANTI-TRIAD CAMPAIGNS.
/18 ....
Page 20Page 21