kakase/hk_gov_press_release huggingface dataset:
Secretary for Justice to speak at UNCITRAL congress in Vienna
1.7.2017

The Secretary for Justice, Mr Rimsky Yuen, SC, will visit Vienna, Austria, from tomorrow (July 2) to July 5 to attend a congress hosted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and give a keynote speech at a session. The congress, with the theme "Modernising International Trade Law to Support Innovation and Sustainable Development", will examine ways in which UNCITRAL can contribute to managing new development issues and fostering innovation through the modernisation of international trade law. Mr Yuen will speak at the session on "Creative international law-making in the international trade law context". During his stay in Vienna, Mr Yuen will meet with the Secretary General of the Federal Ministry of Justice of Austria, Mr Georg Stawa, to exchange views on issues of mutual interest. Mr Yuen will also meet with representatives from Vienna International Arbitral Centre and the Austrian Federal Bar Association. In addition, he will take the opportunity to pay a courtesy call on the Chinese Ambassador to Austria, Mr Li Xiaosi. Mr Yuen will return to Hong Kong in the morning on July 6. Ends/Saturday, July 1, 2017 Issued at HKT 15:00 NNNN
Statement by Department of Justice
27.6.2019

In response to protesters' request for the DoJ not to initiate prosecutions for cases under investigation, a spokesman for the Department of Justice (DoJ) today (June 27) pointed out that all investigations are conducted by law enforcement agencies which will after investigation and when necessary refer to the DoJ for independent decisions on whether to prosecute. The DoJ makes each prosecutorial decision based on evidence, the applicable laws and the Prosecution Code. Unless there is sufficient admissible evidence to support a reasonable prospect of conviction, no prosecution should be commenced. If there is sufficient evidence to initiate a prosecution, the DoJ will then consider whether it is in the public interest to do so, including the nature and seriousness of the offence, the attitude and psychological conditions of the suspect, etc. Irrespective of how an incident is defined by any person, it would not affect the DoJ in discharging its prosecutorial duties impartially in accordance with Article 63 of the Basic Law. The spokesman stressed that the Government has put a stop to the legislative exercise relating to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance. The current term of the Legislative Council will end in July next year, after which the Bill will lapse. The Government accepts this reality. The spokesman appealed to protesters to act peacefully and rationally when expressing their opinions and take into account the needs of other members of the public. Ends/Thursday, June 27, 2019 Issued at HKT 19:40 NNNN
DoJ's response to procession by members of legal sector
6.6.2019

In response to the procession by certain members of the legal sector today (June 6), a spokesman for the Department of Justice (DoJ) issued the following statement: The Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019 aims to deal with the Taiwan murder case and seeks to plug the loopholes in the current regime for legal co-operation in criminal matters. The surrender of fugitive offenders and mutual legal assistance regimes in Hong Kong are devised with reference to the guidelines and model treaties endorsed by the United Nations, and are consistent with human rights protection principles that are commonly followed by the international community. For special surrender arrangements prescribed under the Bill, there can be more safeguards for the protection of the rights of the subject, apart from those provided for by the existing Fugitive Offenders Ordinance (FOO). The Government has been adopting extremely stringent procedures in handling requests for surrender of fugitive offenders. The existing legislation sets out the appropriate human rights and procedural safeguards, as well as the gatekeeping roles of the court and the executive authorities. Executive scrutiny includes the DoJ's examination on whether the surrender request satisfies the legal requirements and the Chief Executive's decision taking into account the DoJ's advice. The judicial process includes open court hearings and application for judicial review (Note 1), habeas corpus (Note 2) or both by the person involved. The FOO has been operating effectively for over almost 22 years since its enactment, striking a balance between pursuit of fugitives and protection of human rights. The independence of the Judiciary is constitutionally provided for and enshrined in Article 85 of the Basic Law. At the same time, the tenure of office of judges is protected by Article 89 of the Basic Law. More importantly, the independence of judges is also reflected in the Judicial Oath, which is a solemn undertaking by every judge to serve the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and administer justice "without fear or favour, self-interest or deceit". The DoJ firmly believes that the Judiciary and all its judicial officers will continue to exercise judicial power in a fair and just manner, and free from any interference. Note 1: The Chief Executive's issue of authority to proceed or surrender order is susceptible to judicial review, see Robert Henry Cosby v Chief Executive of the HKSAR [1999] HKEC 691, Cheng Chui Ping v the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the United States of America [2002] HKCU 5. Note 2: HO Man Kong v Superintendent of Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre [2011] HKEC 1037 is a case on habeas corpus. Ends/Thursday, June 6, 2019 Issued at HKT 20:00 NNNN
Transcript of remarks by S for S and Law Officer (International Law) on Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019
4.6.2019

Following is the transcript of remarks by the Secretary for Security, Mr John Lee, and the Law Officer (International Law) of the Department of Justice, Mr Paul Tsang, at a media session after attending the Legislative Council (LegCo) Panel on Security meeting today (June 4): Reporter: Could you just clarify whether the Chief Executive has the power to reject the Central Government's order to extradite a particular person under Article 24 of the extradition bill related to issues such as national defense as well as diplomacy? Secretary for Security: If you look at the provision under Section 24 (of the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance), actually there are several steps. The Central Government is on notification by the Hong Kong SAR (Special Administrative Region) Government. After the notification, after the due process has been completed, of course, we will also have to report to the Central Government about the Chief Executive's decision to surrender a particular fugitive. After all these steps, according to Section 24, the Central Government can issue a directive to the Chief Executive if there are things that have serious impact on foreign affairs (or defence). But it will only happen on notification by, first of all, the Hong Kong SAR Government, so this is a procedure that will happen after the first step of notification. If the Hong Kong SAR Government does not notify because the Hong Kong SAR Government does not consider this is a case worth dealing with, then there is no notification given to the Central Government. So Subsection 3 of Section 24 in which the Central Government can give directive would not happen. Reporter: Mr Lee, in effect, can you confirm to us that with this clause, it is only giving the Central Government a veto power to an extradition case. But it does not reverse, as your colleague said trumped any decision by Hong Kong government and the Judiciary whether it is a veto power only? Secretary for Security: I think since we have explained it many times, maybe I ask our legal expert to answer your question. Law Officer (International Law): Under Section 24 (3), the CPG (Central People's Government) does have the power to give an instruction to the Chief Executive to do or not to do a surrender. That's expressly provided for in the section. (Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the transcript.) Ends/Tuesday, June 4, 2019 Issued at HKT 20:22 NNNN
Transcript of remarks by SJ and S for S on Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019
2.6.2019

Following is the transcript of remarks by the Secretary for Justice, Ms Teresa Cheng, SC, and the Secretary for Security, Mr John Lee, at a media session on Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019 today (June 2): Reporter: Secretary, I have two questions. One is to follow up on my colleague's question that the Government refuses to write in the law the extra human rights safeguard, and many critics say it doesn't actually protect the human rights of the suspect. Are these only paying lip service to the idea and are these only empty promises? Secondly, have you found out which is the Taiwan central authorities? Secretary for Justice: Shall I start with the first one? The importance of the protection of human rights is something, of course, we have taken care of from the views that have been expressed. Therefore the suggestion from the Government is to allow these to be included in the case-based arrangement that is going to be used. It will maintain flexibility by being not to be prescriptive in listing out in the laws but by allowing that to be in administrative arrangement of policy statement that is being adopted. So that depending on the case, depending on where is the jurisdiction requesting for the surrender of the fugitive and of course depending on the need, we can adopt the relevant provisions. So that flexibility is very important that will make the arrangement even more effective, bearing in mind that the arrangement or the undertaking will have to be signed by both the requesting place and Hong Kong. The protection would still be something that the court would be looked at because this arrangement which will be attached to the Chief Executive's Certificate will be made public in the committal court proceedings. At that stage, anyone or the particular fugitive who is the subject of the proceedings will no doubt be able to take account of that and perhaps to take the matter further to the court in Hong Kong. Secretary for Security: In regard to our discussion with the Taiwan side, as I have explained earlier, in the same way as we deal with any ad hoc requests. Then it will be during our discussion with the requesting party that we will have to ask for the competent authority to be the representative because we will be asking the other side to make guarantee, which the Secretary for Justice has explained. It will have to be a competent authority which is going to represent the jurisdiction to give those guarantee. So that matter will be discussed when we negotiate and make the arrangement with the Taiwan side. (Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the transcript.) Ends/Sunday, June 2, 2019 Issued at HKT 12:25 NNNN
Transcript of remarks by Secretary for Justice at media session
29.5.2019

Following is the transcript of remarks by the Secretary for Justice, Ms Teresa Cheng, SC, at a media session after attending the Legislative Council meeting today (May 29): Reporter: Secretary, you have already stated that the current bill has already provided sufficient safeguards for an ad hoc. Is it misleading for the Government to say the current bill is adding extra safeguards, because there was basically a transition from the current bill? Another question is on Mr Lau Luen-hung's case, as he has withdrawn from the judicial review application. Without commenting on a specific case, do you think the current legislation already provides a safeguard on extradition in absentia? Any case which is convicted in absentia on the accused will have to be retried before he can be extradited to Hong Kong? Secretary for Justice: Right, I think this question, I believe, is from the South China Morning Post. It is very interesting. First, I will deal with the second question. This is the second question relating to the withdrawal of a particular judicial review. It is obviously not apt for me to comment on that. I think whatever you have said, I am sorry, I cannot comment. The second question is also very interesting from the South China Morning Post, asking whether by stating certain things that is misleading. Now, it is very difficult to comment on whether something is misleading or not misleading. But it is very important for the media to report the facts completely, so that the public has a full perception of what the provisions in the law are, and therefore to understand the statements or positions that are made and taken by various people. Thank you very much. (Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the transcript.) Ends/Wednesday, May 29, 2019 Issued at HKT 17:46 NNNN
Transcript of remarks by Secretary for Justice at media session
24.5.2019

Following is the transcript of remarks by the Secretary for Justice, Ms Teresa Cheng, SC, at a media session after attending the "Mediate First" Pledge Event at the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre today (May 24): Reporter: Can you clarify reports that there are three other arbitration cases that you did not resign as arbitrator after you took over to head the Department of Justice? Were these three cases included in the six cases that were approved by the Chief Executive? Secretary for Justice: First of all, there are two questions that are mentioned. The first is whether I resigned in three cases. The three cases I assume that you are talking about are the three cases of the World Bank ICSID (International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes) cases. They are in the public domain. So if you can go on the web, you will see that in all those three cases I have well resigned as arbitrator. And I am no longer arbitrator in those cases. Those cases are still ongoing because the fact that I resigned and the new arbitrator is appointed to replace my role would, of course, allow the parties to continue to have their dispute resolved under the relevant rules. So those three cases continue but I am not the arbitrator. And if there is any reporting that I have not resigned from those three cases, they are wrong. Reporter: When did you resign? Did you resign after you took over as the Secretary for Justice? Or did you resign before that? Were these three cases included in the six cases that were approved by the Chief Executive? Thank you. Secretary for Justice: The resignation process has to be looked at in this way. First of all, bearing in mind the six cases that I have had to handle, for the reasons that we have already mentioned when I took the appointment as the Secretary for Justice. The cases of which there is no further involvement or that I can resign without causing too much troubles to the parties, I have completely resigned. So, in all the cases I resigned. There are six cases as we have reported, as you have noted, and as informed to the Chief Executive where I continue to serve as an arbitrator in order to finish what I am doing, or what I was doing at that point in time with my co-arbitrators. So in those six cases I continued to remain as arbitrator in finishing, for example, the interim award, or final award that I have had to handle, or the rendering the interim order, interim measures, or interlocutory orders that I have had to handle at that point in time. Once those relevant orders and awards have been rendered, assigned and distributed, I immediately resigned. Thank you. (Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the transcript.) Ends/Friday, May 24, 2019 Issued at HKT 12:20 NNNN
DoJ publishes guide to judicial review proceedings: "The Judge Over Your Shoulder" 
22.5.2019

A spokesman for the Department of Justice (DoJ) today (May 22) announced the publication of the latest edition of "The Judge Over Your Shoulder - A Guide to Judicial Review for Administrators" (JOYS) at the DoJ's website ( www.doj.gov.hk/eng/public/The_Judge_Over_Your_Shoulder.html ). "Since it was first published in 2010, JOYS has served to provide guidance to administrators in the Government on principles of judicial review which are relevant to their work as decision or policy makers. The purpose of the publication is to provide a better understanding of judicial review so as to maintain the highest standards of public administration in Hong Kong," the spokesman said. "The latest edition of JOYS is now available on the DoJ's website in English and Chinese versions. We hope that the guide, by providing an overview of the relevant law, will serve as a useful general reference for not only government officials, but anyone who wishes to understand more about judicial review, which is an integral part of the Hong Kong legal system," the spokesman continued. Ends/Wednesday, May 22, 2019 Issued at HKT 16:13 NNNN
Transcript of remarks by Secretary for Justice at media session 
22.5.2019

Following is the transcript of remarks by the Secretary for Justice, Ms Teresa Cheng, SC, at a media session after attending the Chief Executive's Question Time at the Legislative Council today (May 22): Reporter: What steps are you going to take in relation to the two Hong Kong asylum seekers in Germany? How does it reflect on Hong Kong's traditional freedom? Secretary for Justice: Your statement is based on an assumption that I haven't seen the evidence of. It is a statement that is reported in a particular media. I am not able therefore to really comment on that media report or that basis of the assumption at this stage. (Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the transcript.) Ends/Wednesday, May 22, 2019 Issued at HKT 12:36 NNNN
Talk on Foreign Investment Law of the People's Republic of China held (with photos) 
10.5.2019

The talk on the Foreign Investment Law of the People's Republic of China, which was adopted at the 2nd Session of the 13th National People's Congress on March 15, 2019, and will be implemented in the Mainland on January 1, 2020, was held today (May 10) for government officials of Hong Kong and stakeholders to understand more about this Law. The talk was jointly held by the Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Asian Academy of International Law (AAIL) at Justice Place. The Secretary for Justice, Ms Teresa Cheng, SC, first gave welcoming remarks at the talk. The Assistant Minister of Commerce, Mr Li Chenggang, then gave a presentation on the rationales for enacting the Foreign Investment Law, its key features, how to fully implement the Foreign Investment Law and how to create a better business environment for investment from Hong Kong. During the question-and-answer session of the talk, the Chairman of the AAIL, Mr Anthony Neoh, SC, had exchanges with Mr Li on issues on the Foreign Investment Law that are of interest to the participants. The talk successfully enhanced the participants' understanding of the Foreign Investment Law. The Foreign Investment Law aims to promote foreign investment, protect the legitimate interests of foreign investment and standardise the management of foreign investment. The Hong Kong community generally welcomes the Foreign Investment Law. Over 140 people, including senior government officials, representatives from local and foreign chambers of commerce, business leaders, professionals and arbitration institutions attended the talk. One of the key policy initiatives of the DoJ is to enhance Hong Kong's status as the regional legal services and dispute resolution centre. The DoJ is committed to assisting Hong Kong's legal and dispute resolution services professionals to seek new opportunities in the Mainland, the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area and countries along the Belt and Road Initiative, and to strengthen co-operation and mutual benefits under the advantage of "one country, two systems". Ends/Friday, May 10, 2019 Issued at HKT 17:04 NNNN
Secretary for Justice visits Kowloon City District (with photos)
3.5.2019

The Secretary for Justice, Ms Teresa Cheng, SC, visited Kowloon City District today (May 3) to tour a primary school and a support service centre for ethnic minorities and meet with District Council members. Accompanied by the Chairman of the Kowloon City District Council (KCDC), Mr Pun Kwok-wah, and the District Officer (Kowloon City), Mr Franco Kwok, Ms Cheng first visited SKH Holy Cross Primary School, where she observed school activities on STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) and chatted with students. Ms Cheng then went to the Support Service Centre for Ethnic Minorities in Lok Sin Tong Lee Yin Yee United Centre. The centre provides a wide range of services for children and youths. It also organises various language classes and interest groups to help ethnic minorities integrate into the community. Ms Cheng toured the centre's services and facilities, and she chatted with some ethnic minority residents to learn more about their daily lives. Before concluding her visit, Ms Cheng met with members of the KCDC to exchange views on issues of concern. Ends/Friday, May 3, 2019 Issued at HKT 18:43 NNNN
Speech by SJ at thematic forum on policy co-ordination of second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in Beijing (English only)
25.4.2019

Speech by SJ at thematic forum on policy co-ordination of second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in Beijing (English only) Following is the speech by the Secretary for Justice, Ms Teresa Cheng, SC, at the thematic forum on policy co-ordination of the second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in Beijing this morning (April 25): Your excellency, ladies and gentlemen, The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) straddles different borders, cultures and legal systems. It reflects the design of the new type of international relations, featuring win-win co-operation. It creates a new globalism, and advocates harmony, multilateralism and inclusiveness. It resonates with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and reinforces each other. A policy angle that I would like to talk about is the rule of law and one facet of it is dispute resolution. The number of co-operation agreements and memorandums of understanding that have been signed under the BRI is 176 and the number is still growing. Yet, the implementation may create differences leading to conflicts and disputes. It is of paramount importance that a dispute avoidance and resolution system which echoes the spirit of the initiative be developed to ensure that the common cause of this new international co-operation for development remains the priority. The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is keen to collaborate and develop such a system. Hong Kong is privileged to have a sound and robust legal system, coupled with up-to-date and fair arbitration and mediation laws and practice that have earned international recognition. To address the characteristics of Belt and Road-related transaction disputes, we propose two points for consideration. Firstly, thought should be given as to whether a body established through collaboration, based on creditability and sensitive to cultural diversity, be set up. Secondly, consideration should also be given to look at how to enhance the system of dispute resolution and to be innovative so as to provide an inclusive and affordable mechanism that leads to a win-win solution. Under the principle of shared growth through discussion and collaboration, active consideration may be given to the provision of diversified dispute resolution services for Belt and Road countries. Hong Kong hopes to contribute to the implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative, and facilitate the communication and collaboration of different countries, thereby ushering in an all-win situation hand in hand, and contributing to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals, in particular Goal 16 which promotes the rule of law, peace, justice and strong institutions. Thank you very much. Go to Top