TNAG-0258-FCO40-294-Legislation-relating-to-criminal-procedure-in-Hong-Kong-1971 — Page 113

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

W(B)L 51-7406

CONFIDENT IAL

(1) That although the Supreme Court of

Hong Kong has very wide inherent powers of

clearing the court and punishing for contempt,

neither a district judge nor magistrate has

such inherent power.

(2) That although in times of emergency the

conferring of such extensive powers on sub-

ordinate courts might be justified, it is very

questionable whether such justification exists

in normal times, even in the particular

circumstances of Hong Kong.

(3) That Sections 122 and 123 appear to confer

powers, both on the Supreme Court and on sub-

which are

ordinate courtsider even than the present

inherent powers of the Supreme Court.

(1) That the two sections in question enable

members of the public to be excluded from the

court both during the hearing of a case and

The

during the announcement of the verdict.

conferring of such a power is, so far as is known,

unprecedented in the British system of law.

It

1

also departs from the principle of Article 6(1)

of the European Convention for the Protection of

Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which was

allthough

ratified by Her Majesty's Government in 1951

Majes

this Cangention has not been applied to Hong Kong) = ?

hat so far as Section 122 is concerned, it is

true that the press cannot be excluded either from

the hearing of a case or during the announcement of

the verdict. But this will not enable relatives

and friends of the accused actually to see verdict

accused

passed on the latter; nor will it necessarily

ensure that they will know what has happened to

the accused.

(a)

This is because:

press might not report the result of

the case;

/(b)