TNAG-1704-FCO40-2376-Crime-and-sentencing-in-Hong-Kong-various-ordinances-1988 — Page 2

On 20 November 1985 a second Select Committee was appointed. It met on 19 occasions and received a large body of oral and written evidence, the minutes of which run to 1094 pages. The Committee reported on 30 July 1986

1986 making 57 recommendations.

Scope of the recommendations

5

The Select Committee concentrated on specific areas relating to complex commercial crime. They covered: investigation and monitoring; committal proceedings and the alternatives; preparation for trial; conduct of the trial; presentation of evidence; mode of trial and staff and training. The recommendations are reproduced at the Annexure.

Administration response

6

Given the general background of controversy

of controversy to this matter, and having due regard to the public interest need for urgent action to be taken to reduce the heavy financial and legal and judicial resources burden created by the

the flow of heavy cases, it is thought that the only feasible strategy for the Administration to adopt is to implement the report, so far practicable. Where a recommendation could fairly be Improved or modified within the spirit of the report this should be pointed out and the recommendation should be revised and implemented accordingly. Where existing systems

systems meet the spirit of a recommendation this will be

be explained and the status quo maintained.

as

for

7

This approach was endorsed by the Chief Secretary's Legal Affairs Policy Group (LAPG) on 3 December 1986. The LAPG also agreed to the policy responsibility breakown implementation which appears in the margin to the Annexure. Work has commenced along the lines of the implementation action suggested in the Annexure. A third draft of a Complex Commercial Crime Bill is in preparation.

Mode of trial

8

The Select Committee concluded that the mode of trial for complex commercial crimes should remain unchanged. It is proposed to withdraw the 1985 Bill from the Legislative Council when the new Bill is introduced. The source of the original controversy will thus be removed.

Case controller

9

that leading

The Select Committee recommended prosecution counsel should be nominated

should be nominated Case Controller from the inception of the case (see recommendations 6 and 18). His