XN000022-1996-03-13 — Page 19

There are two different rules of corroboration in respect of sexual offences. One rule requires that, where the allegation against an accused is supported by the evidence of one witness only, that witness' evidence must be corroborated by some independent evidence tending to prove the guilt of the accused. Without such corroborative evidence, the accused cannot be convicted of the offence alleged, even if the judge or jury is convinced that he is guilty of the offence. There are seven types of a sexual offences under the Crimes Ordinance to which this rule applies. These include procuring a person by threats or intimidation to do an unlawful sexual act, and procuring a person to become a prostitute.

The other rule applies to all other types of sexual offences. It requires a judge to give a warning of the dangers of convicting a person on the uncorroborated evidence of a victim of sexual offence. If a judge fails to give such a warning, this may result in the accused's conviction being overturned on appeal, even though the evidence was, in fact, corroborated.

In many common law jurisdictions, the rules governing corroboration have been criticised as unsatisfactory. They work particularly to the disadvantage of victims of sexual offences whose evidence is characterised as inherently unreliable. In addition, the rules are extremely difficult to explain and apply, and are rigid in their application. The corroboration rules applying to sexual offences have already been abolished in England, Canada, New Zealand and some Australian states.

I would remind Members that, in Hong Kong, the corroboration rules that used to apply to the evidence of an accomplice and a child witness were recently abolished. This Bill now proposes to abolish the corroboration rules applying to sexual offences. I would add that the abolition of the rules would not prevent a judge from giving a warning about the reliability of the evidence of any witness in proceedings for a sexual offence if, on the particular facts of the case, the judge considered this necessary.

Clause 2 of the Bill introduces a new section 4B into the Evidence Ordinance to provide for the abolition of the rule requiring a corroboration warning to be given in proceedings for a sexual offence. Section 4 of the Schedule to the Bill repeals the requirement for corroboration in respect of seven sexual offences under the Crimes Ordinance.

Mr President, the proposed enhancement of the powers of the High Court to obtain evidence is consistent with the bilateral legal mutual assistance agreements that Hong Kong is negotiating, and with international practice. The proposed abolition of the rules of corroboration applying to sexual offences is consistent with developments in other common law jurisdictions and with Hong Kong's recent reforms to the law regarding accomplices and children. Both measures will improve the administration of justice. I commend the Bill to this Council.

End