TNAG-0262-FCO40-298-Appointments-to-judiciary-of-Hong-Kong-1970 — Page 93

248

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 7th January 1970,

【THE

ĮTHE ATTORNEY GENERAL] Magistrates-(Amendment) Bill-

second reading

The amendments proposed by clauses 2 and 4 of the bill and the schedule are consequential upon these which would be effected by clause 3.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill read the second time.

Bill committed to a committee of the whole Jouncil pursuant to Standing Order No 43(1).

Explanatory Memorandum

The power under Part IV of the Magistrates Ordinance to transfer offences to the District Coft for trial is limited to certain indictable offences.

The purpose of this Bill to extend this power to summary offences, so that where a summary offence, and an indictable offence which is transferable to the District Court, are charged against the same accused, both offences may be heard in the District Court thus making it unnecessary for the same evidence to be given twice, once in the District Court for the indictable offence and once in the trial before the magistrate of the summary offence.

Clause 3, which repeals and replaces subsection (1) of section 88 of the principal Ordinance, provides accordingly.

Clause 2 makes a consequential amendment to the heading to Part IV of the principal Ordinance.

Clause 4 provides for a Schedule in which are specified amendments consequential upon the proposed subsection (1) of

section 88

SUPREME COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL 1970

Resumption of debate on second reading (17th December 1969)

Question again proposed.

MR O. V. CHEUNG:-Sir, I welcome the remarks made by my honourable Friend the Attorney General in moving the second reading of this bill* and particularly those which stress that the time has come to give the Full Court a more distinctive and permanent character, and

* Page 202.

ť

A

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL · 7th January 1970. 249

that the creation of separate a Court of Appeal has been borne in mind. For many years the legal profession in Hong Kong has advocated the creation of a Court of Appeal, and whilst I think that the amount of appellate work in Hong Kong would justify taking that step now, I am conscious that the necessary consulations and legislation to effect that would take some time.

I have considerable misgivings, however, about the creation of the office of an Appeal Judge, and as the clause in the bill even if enacted is not to come into operation until some indefinite time in the future, there would appear to me to be no urgency in creating such office, and I would welcome the deletion of the clauses which seek to create it, pending an examination of the question of creating a separate Court of Appeal. I hope however that Government will give this question of creating such a Court urgent consideration.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (MR ROBERTS): -Sir, at this stage I do not think I can say more than that the proposals put forward by the honourable Member will be carefully considered in consultation with the Chief Justice. If it is felt that the references in the bill to an Appeal Judge should be removed pending a review of the need for a separate Court of Appeal on the lines suggested by the honourable Member, then of course the necessary amendments could be moved in committee stage.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill read the second time.

Bill committed to a committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order No 43.

"ULL COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL 1970

Resumption of debate on second reading (17th December 1969)

Question again proposed.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill read the second time.

Bill committed to a committee of the whole Council pursuant to Standing Order No 43.

DISTRICT COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL 1970

Resumption of debate on second reading (17th December 1969)

"Question again proposed.