TNAG-2156-FCO40-3076-International-Covenant-on-Civil-and-Political-Rights-(ICCPR)-1990 — Page 154

CCPR/C/58/Add.6 page 122

54. Concern was also expressed at the 1988 session of the Human Rights Committee about the nature of information given to magistrates on the strength of which search warrants might be issued. The Administration has had no complaints that information provided to magistrates before the issue of search warrants is inadequate in any way. The grounds on which any warrant has been issued are open to judicial review in Hong Kong. There have been two recent requests for such review.

55.

The first case was a request for review of a search warrant obtained by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) over a solicitors' firm. The solicitors claimed privilege for the documents sought by ICAC and also that the warrant was so wide as to be invalid. The case was heard on 31 July 1989 and it was concluded that the warrant was too wide because it did not specify the offence alleged and did not exclude documents which might be privileged. However, it was held that the documents sought by the ICAC were not privileged and that the solicitors should have handed them over when asked. The search warrant was quashed but the solicitors were not awarded costs and the documents were ordered to be made available to the ICAC.

56. The second case was the request for judicial review of a search warrant obtained by the police over another solicitors' firm. It was heard on 30 August 1989. The Attorney General conceded that the warrant had been obtained illegally. The applicant undertook not to commence further

proceedings. No declaration was made and neither side was awarded the costs of the application.

Article 19

57. The discussion of this article at the Committee meeting in 1988 touched on the so-called "false news" provision in section 27 of the Public Order Ordinance. A review of this provision was undertaken in Hong Kong in November 1988. The conclusion reached was that, while the original concerns which led to the section being enacted remained valid, it had been misinterpreted as an attempt to restrict the press. In the circumstances, retention of the section would be likely to cause concern to the public out of proportion to the value to the community of keeping the provision. The section was therefore repealed by the Legislative Council in January 1989.

58.

Members of the Committee also mentioned Official Secrets legislation, and in particular section 2 of the United Kingdom Acts. As the United Kingdom delegation explained during the meeting, the Official Secrets Acts are laws of the United Kingdom which are applied to Hong Kong and all other dependent territories. The Official Secrets Act 1989, which replaces section 2 of the 1911 Act, received the Royal Assent on 11 May 1989 and is expected to come into force later this year. The provisions of the Act may be extended by Order in Council to any of the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or any dependent territory. Legislation covering this subject matter will, before 1997, be enacted by the Hong Kong Legislative Council and will replace the United Kingdom legislation as currently applied to Hong Kong.

Article 21

59. The general situation in Hong Kong regarding freedom of assembly and the Public Order Ordinance was described at length at the Human Rights Committee meeting in November 1988 (CCPR/C/SR.857, paras. 60 and 66-67).