Equal Opportunities Commission (Hong Kong)
Established in 1996, the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) is Hong Kong’s statutory body responsible for the implementation of the anti-discrimination ordinances, namely the Sex Discrimination Ordinance, the Disability Discrimination Ordinance, the Family Status Discrimination Ordinance and the Race Discrimination Ordinance. History. Background. In 1994, the median wage of women in Hong Kong were about a third lower than that of men, and classified advertisements often limited senior positions in the private sector to men and low-paying jobs sought for female applicants. The Hong Kong government has had a history of opposing anti -discrimination legislation. When the United Kingdom ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1986, the effect of CEDAW was extended to other British dependent territories. However, the Hong Kong government requested that CEDAW to not be extended to Hong Kong until it could assess its effect, claiming that the ratification of CEDAW might lead to "significant economic and social consequences". Specifically, the government believed that CEDAW and anti-discrimination laws would harm Hong Kong's laissez-faire market and traditional Chinese customs that treat men and women differently. In the 1990s, the  Hong Kong government was increasingly pressured to address equality and human rights. During the 1991 legislative election, which produced Hong Kong's first directly elected lawmakers, women's groups pressured candidates into acknowledging discrimination against women in the city. As a result, the 1991 Legislative Council asserted more pressure on the executive than its predecessors. In November 1991, Legislative Councillor Emily Lau helped form an ad-hoc group in the legislature to study women's issues. In March 1992, an inter-departmental working group on sex discrimination was established to advise the government on whether to extend CEDAW to Hong  Kong. On 16 December 1992, Lau introduced a bill that called on the Hong Kong government to support the application of CEDAW in the city. The government opposed the bill, but it was nonetheless passed after all but the three ex-officio members voted in its favour. The Hong Kong government did not act on the bill immediately and maintained that the public must first be consulted. After nine months of preparation, it issued the "Green Paper on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men" in August 1993. Legal scholar Carole Petersen said the government had understated the discrimination against women  in the green paper. By the end of the public consultation on the green paper, Secretary for Home Affairs Michael Suen admitted that "[it] would be difficult for [the government] to come up with credible arguments not to extend CEDAW". Founding. Anna Wu, then an appointed Legislative Councillor, tabled the Equal Opportunities Bill 1994 before the legislature, during a period leading up to the handover of Hong Kong which Wu believed to have given a window of opportunity for expanding equality rights. The bill sought to outlaw discrimination on a number of grounds, including sex, marital status, pregnancy, sexuality, race , age, disability, and political and religious conviction. If passed, it would also prohibit employers from placing advertisements that discriminate against job seekers by their sex and age. As a private members' bill, which did not affect government revenue, the Equal Opportunities Bill was tabled without prior government consent. Wu also proposed the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission Bill, which would create a statutory body for equality and a tribunal to adjudicate claims under the Equal Opportunities Bill. The Equal Opportunities Tribunal could cost 800 million Hong Kong dollars to set up. The proposed equality institutions were also opposed by  China. Legal scholar Wu Jianfan of Peking University and Hong Kong pro-Beijing politician Raymond Wu said the bill would violate the Basic Law, which was to become Hong Kong's mini-constitution following the United Kingdom's transfer of the city's sovereignty to China in 1997. Wu Jianfan said the tribunal was not mentioned in the Basic Law and could not exist in Hong Kong under Chinese rule. The Hong Kong government rejected the bills in June 1994 and instead tabled two other bills with a narrower scope that prohibited sex and disability discrimination respectively. The bill on  sex discrimination also sought to set up an equal opportunities commission instead of the independent human rights commission Anna Wu had proposed. The decision drew criticism from Wu and equality groups, which said the Equal Opportunities Commission, unlike the human rights commission, had no legal power to prosecute people found to have violated anti-discrimination laws; it could only monitor complaints of discrimination and settle them. Despite government opposition, Wu's Equal Opportunities Bill proceeded through different stages at the Legislative Council. Public hearings on the bill were held in 1995. In April 1995, Wu decided to break the bill  into three bills, each addressing different areas of discrimination, to ensure some portions of it could pass before the legislative session ends. On the other hand, the government on 27 May 1995 pushed to resume second reading of its Sex Discrimination Bill against the wishes of the bills committee and before amendments were finalised. The Sex Discrimination Bill was passed at 1:25am on 29 June 1995 after a nine-hour debate, during which the government and pro-business legislators quashed attempts by liberal lawmakers to expand the scope of the bill to include removing the Small House Policy exemption and  shortening the grace period for small businesses. The EOC was established on 20 May 1996 with Fanny M. Cheung has its inaugural chairperson, after candidates such as Elsie Leung had turned down the offer that included a salary of $157,250 and cash bonus $70,320 every month. Early history. In 1997, the EOC brought its first sex discrimination case to court against "Apple Daily", which placed an advertisement for "pretty female reporters" to report on balls and social events. The District Court ruled in favour of "Apple Daily", with the judge deciding that the ambiguous language used on the  advertisement, placed in the celebrity section of the newspaper, meant it did not violate the Sex Discrimination Ordinance. The Court of Appeal then overturned the decision, saying that allowing the ambiguous language would permit employers to advertise freely for only one gender. The court did not impose penalties, and the EOC said it was more important to clarify the law than to punish "Apple Daily". Anna Wu replaced Fanny Cheung as the EOC's chairperson on 1 August 1999, who has been a member of the commission since its founding. Former appeals court judges Michael Wong then replaced Wu from  1 August 2003. Supporters of Wu said her contract was not renewed because she had criticised the government during her tenure as the EOC's chairperson. Wong's period as EOC chairperson was short. Wong dismissed Patrick Yu before he took the post as the commission's operations director because Yu had said in the "South China Morning Post" that Hong Kong should enact a race discrimination law, which Wong saw as an inappropriate comment. Prior to taking up his position at the EOC, Yu was the executive director of the Northern Ireland Council for Ethnic Minorities. On 6 November , Wong stepped down after being embroiled in a scandal involving the dismissal of EOC director of operations Patrick Yu, who was appointed by Anna Wu, and allegations that he had accepted free airline tickets as a Court of Appeals judge. The Independent Commission Against Corruption initiated an investigation against Wong into the allegation of bribery, but Wong was not prosecuted due to insufficient evidence. Powers and Functions. The EOC's main function is to implement the four anti-discrimination ordinances in Hong Kong, namely the Sex Discrimination Ordinance, the Disability Discrimination Ordinance, the Family Status Discrimination Ordinance and the Race  Discrimination Ordinance. It aims to eliminate discrimination, to promote equal opportunities and to receive complaints and investigate alleged cases of discrimination. Where cases of potential discrimination is identified, the EOC is empowered to provide legal assistance (including representation in court) to plaintiffs. It also conducts research and offers public educational programmes to promote equal opportunities. The EOC also has the power to review the effectiveness of the anti-discrimination ordinances and propose amendments. The EOC's first Discrimination Law Review commenced in 2014 and had its final report published in 2016. Controversies. Michael Wong's travel claims. In 2003, Michael  Wong Kin-chow was removed as the Chairman of the EOC after an investigation by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) revealed that Mr Wong had deliberately made improper applications to the HKSAR Government for reimbursement of several first-class flights between 1998 and 2001, valued at . It was also reported that Mr Wong had continued to draw his pension as a former High Court judge while he was employed at the EOC. The ICAC's report was submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in November 2005 who ultimately decided not to lay charges. Alfred Chen's suitability . On 1 June 2016, a concern was raised by some legislators that the newly appointed chairperson, Alfred Chen, had expressed views which suggested he was not suitably aware of the key issues necessary to execute his duties as head of the EOC. These included a dismissal of the need to address the lack of any anti-discrimination ordinance to protect sexual minorities, confusion of concepts such as gender identity and sexual orientation, and declaring that the EOC should echo the views of the government.