XN000022-1994-10-26 — Page 31

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1994

15

ATTORNEY GENERAL SPEAKS ON MOTION OF THANKS

* *

TODAY

FOLLOWING IS THE SPEECH BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE HON JEREMY MATHEWS, IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL DEBATE ON MOTION OF THANKS (WEDNESDAY):

MR PRESIDENT,

COUNCIL LAB+ IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS MADE BY MEMBERS OF THIS WEEK, I PROPOSE TO DISCUSS FOUR MATTERS TODAY, THE RULE OF LAW, ISSUES CONFRONTING THE JUDICIARY, LEGAL ISSUES ARISING DURING THE TRANSITION, AND PRESS FREEDOM.

RULE OF LAW

IS

THE MAINTENANCE OF THE RULE OF LAW IN HONG KONG OF CRUCIAL CONCERN NOT ONLY TO LAWYERS AND LEGISLATORS BUT, I BELIEVE,

OF TO

LIFE IT IS SO MUCH A PART OF OUR WAY THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE. THAT ONE RARELY STOPS TO ASK WHAT "THE RULE OF LAW”

ACTUALLY MEANS.

THE

A

THERE ARE SEVERAL VITAL PRINCIPLES UNDER THE PRINCIPLE OF RULE OF LAW. ONE IS THAT LAWS OPERATE SEPARATELY FROM THE POLITICAL SYSTEM; THEY ARE PUBLISHED AND ARE ACCESSIBLE; AND THEY PROVIDE DEGREE OF CERTAINTY AND PREDICTABILITY AS TO HOW DISPUTES ARE TO BE RESOLVED. A SECOND PRINCIPLE IS THAT EVERYONE, NO MATTER HOW HIGH, IS SUBJECT TO THE LAW, AND THAT A PERSON CAN ONLY BE PUNISHED FOR CONDUCT

OF THAT

A THIRD PRINCIPLE IS THAT

EQUALITY IS A BREACH OF THE LAW.

THE LAW BEFORE THE LAW: NO ONE GETS BETTER OR WORSE TREATMENT UNDER

ON. A FOURTH BECAUSE OF HIS OR HER STATUS, WEALTH, RACE AND SO PRINCIPLE IS THAT THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES IS IN THE HANDS OF JUDGES WHO ARE INDEPENDENT OF THE EXECUTIVE AND WHO MAY NOT BE PRESSURE FROM ANY SOURCE IN CARRYING OUT THEIR DUTIES.

SUBJECT TO

MADE BY MR ONE SPECIFIC

ABOUT THE RULE OF LAW WAS COMMENT

ON MARTIN BARROW, WHO SAID THAT EFFECTIVE SANCTIONS SHOULD BE IMPOSED

THIS COMMENT OFFENDERS. HE CONSIDERED THAT SOME FINES ARE TOO LOW.

OF LAW CIVES ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN THE WAY IN WHICH THE RULE OPERATES IN RESPECT OF SENTENCING.

COMMUNITY

CONSIDERS THAT FIRSTLY, IT

WHAT CAN THE EXECUTIVE DO, IF THE SENTENCES IMPOSED FOR A PARTICULAR OFFENCE ARE TOO LOW?

IT MAY BE, FOR CAN CONSIDER WHETHER THE MAXIMUM PENALTY IS ADEQUATE. EXAMPLE, THAT INFLATION HAS ERODED THE VALUE OF THE PRESCRIBED MAXIMUM MAY FINE.

OR CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENCE

FOR. SECONDLY, THE MEAN THAT A REVISION OF THE PENALTY IS CALLED

THE COURT OF ATTORNEY GENERAL CAN, IN APPROPRIATE CASES, APPLY TO

BUT WHAT THE EXECUTIVE APPEAL FOR A REVIEW OF THE SENTENCES IMPOSED.

HEAVIER SENTENCES. CANNOT DO, IS SIMPLY DIRECT THE JUDGES TO IMPOSE

IMPOSING THIS WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE RULE OF LAW.

SENTENCING SENTENCES, MUST DO SO IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AND THE

IN SO DOING, THEY MUST GUIDELINES LAID DOWN BY THE COURT OF APPEAL. BE AND ARE FREE FROM ANY CONTROL OR INFLUENCE BY THE EXECUTIVE.

WHEN JUDGES,

/THE JUDICIARY.