TNAG-1449-FCO40-1953-Minutes-and-Hansards-of-the-Legislative-Council-of-Hong-Kong-1986 — Page 321

2

1

Attorney General: Sir, I am.

I think, now too long in Government

to project with any accuracy how long anything will take to thresh

out real difficulties and bring forward proposals but I hope the hon.

Member will accept my assurance that I will try to speed up that

process as far as possible, recognising the real concern that is

in the community about this matter. So far as the problems of

intimidation or retaliation are concerned, it is, I think, the case

that one of the reasons for including residential associations,

owners' corporations and mutual aid committees in the category of

those that can apply for closure orders is to provide some measure

of protection from fear of individual retaliation and to place less

stress on individuals and reduce the scope for intimidation on the

part of those responsible for these vice-associated establishments.

Mrs.

Fan: Sir, the Attorney General in his reply referred to

the scheme which would include provisions for objections by landlords

and others having an interest in the premises. This seems to be a

fairly wide group of people. Does that mean that if for example the

landlord who actually rents that premises to the lady in question makes

an objection then action cannot be taken?

Attorney General: The proposed scheme is this: it would start with

the complaint made by the residents or their association

to a magistrate. If the magistrate was satisfied that the complaint

was a reasonable one and that the nuisance had been made out, he

would issue a provisional closure order addressed to the occupier of

those premises and that person would be given an opportunity to object

but notice should also be given at that time to anyone who is known