TNAG-1555-FCO40-2119-Broadcasting-in-Hong-Kong-1986 — Page 79

26

extensive survey of identification parades. In only 1.2% of the total number of parades examined [651] did witnesses comment that they could not bring themselves to identify the person. The survey did not give any guide to the possible increase in numbers of people who would come forward as witnesses if identification was made out of the sight and hearing of the suspect. This could only be discovered by a sophisticated survey of a large section of community.

4.9

A review of the practice in closely related common law jurisdictions, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, shows that they adopt a practice broadly similar to that employed in identification parades in Hong Kong. All place their primary emphasis on fairness to the suspect. All reflect an essential feature of the common law trial process, that the witness confronts the suspect with his accusation.

4.10

In the United States "line ups", as they are called, are conducted using a one-way viewer, where the witness observes the suspect, and a number of individuals of broadly similar appearance, as they are brought out of the line up to face the mirror. Fairness to the suspect is achieved by limiting the questions the Police ask of the witness at the line up to avoid any suggestion of prompting, and the constitutional rule that entitles a suspect to the attendance of his counsel at the parade in the presence of the witness.

4.11

Option It would be possible to adopt in Hong Kong a system similar to that employed in the United States. To do so would not require any changes in the law* but would require the drafting of supplementary Police Orders. The practice at identification parades is not governed by laws of evidence as such, though the courts would reasonably require that the new system be as free from doubt as the method presently employed. The present procedure permits attendance of the suspect's solicitor although a solicitor is rarely present. This practice would have to be available under the alternative system and indeed would probably be essential. If the suspect did not have a solicitor, an alternative could be for there to be present an independent observer of high standing in the community. The solicitor would be entitled to be present with the witness who would make observation under the supervision of a senior police officer.

* But there is some doubt as to the admissibility of

certain evidence produced following an

identification parade involving a one-way viewer. To remove this doubt it might be necessary to introduce legislation.