XN000022-1985-05-01 — Page 10

8

WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 1335

MOTION ON COMMERCIAL CRIMES SELECT COMMITTEE

******

WHEN THE TRIAL OF COMMERCIAL CRIMES BILL WAS INTRODUCED INTO THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL THE RESPONSE WAS GENERALLY IN FAVOUR OF A CHANGE IN THE MODE OF TRIAL FOR THESE OFFENCES AND ITS OPPONENTS SEEMED TO BE IN THE MINORITY, THE SENIOR UNOFFICIAL MEMBER OF LEGCO, SIR ROGER LOBO, SAID TODAY (WEDNESDAY).

HOWEVER, HE SAID, SINCE THE BILL WAS PUBLISHED, A SWELL OF PUBLIC OPINION TO POSTPONE IT AND GIVE THE MATTER FURTHER CONSIDERATION HAD GROWN. MANY PEOPLE HAD EXPRESSED STRONG VIEWS THAT THEY DID NOT VOLUNTEER DURING THE CONSULTATIVE PROCESS= OTHERS HAD CHANGED THEIR VIEWS AND WERE OPPOSED TO CHANGE, AT LEAST AT THIS TIME.

SIR ROGER WAS PRESENTING A MOTION IN THE COUNCIL CALLING FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A SELECT COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER AND REPORT ON THE APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO BE TAKEN TO RESOLVE THE PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN THE PROSECUTION AND TRIAL OF COMPLEX COMMERCIAL CRIMES, INCLUDING CHANGES IN THE PROCEDURES BEFORE AND DURING THE TRIAL AND THE MODE OF TRIAL. +

HE POINTED OUT THAT AN AD HOC GROUP OF UNOFFICIALS UNDER THE CONVENERSHIP OF MR PETER C. WONG, HAD BEEN HEARING PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS AND EXAMINING THE BILL.

+ IT HAS BECOME EVIDENT THAT THERE ARE SERIOUS PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN THE PROSECUTION AND TRIAL OF COMPLEX COMMERCIAL CRIMES.

+WHAT THE SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS ARE AND WHETHER THE BILL PROPOSES ONE ANSWER OR A PARTIAL ANSWER WE DO NOT KNOW.

+HOWEVER, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT, WHATEVER THE MERITS OF THE BILL MAY BE, PUBLIC OPINION IS SUCH THAT IT WOULD BE UNWISE TO PROCEED WITH THE MEASURE UNTIL THERE HAS BEEN AN THOROUGH EXAMINATION OF ALL THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE, HE SAID.

THE MOTION BEFORE THE COUNCIL PROPOSED THE APPOINTMENT OF A SELECT COMMITTEE UNDER STANDING ORDER 61 TO CONDUCT THAT EXAMINATION.

SIR ROGER SAID IN FAIRNESS, WHETHER OR NOT THE PROPOSALS IN THE BILL WERE RIGHT, HE DID NOT THINK THE ADMINISTRATION SHOULD BE CRITICISED FOR FAILING TO CONSULT ADEQUATELY.

HE RECALLED THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE LAW SOCIETY HAD SAID THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR INTRODUCING THE BILL HAD PREPARED AND

INTRODUCED IT IN THE REASONABLE BELIEF THAT IT WOULD BE MORE WIDELY SUPPORTED THAN IT HAD TURNED OUT TO BE THE CASE, AND ALL WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THAT BELIEF MUST SHARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF NOT HAVING VOICED THE IR RESERVATIONS AT AN EARLIER STAGE.

-

19

Page 10Page 11