*********************************************************
The following is issued on behalf of the Judiciary:
In response to press enquiries on utilisation of court room, a spokesman of the Judiciary said today (March 29) that the "low" utilisation of court room observed is more apparent than real.
The spokesman noted that it was caused by the unpredictable development during the trial of cases, e.g. pleading guilty or achieving settlement at the early stages, cases under-run or over-run, as well as adjournment requested by parties.
"Under the current listing policy, it is expected that judges would use the court rooms allocated to them for a full day every day.
"Courtroom sharing is only possible if the listing policy is changed so that judges are not listed with trials for every day.
"But this may result in long queues and waiting time," the spokesman explained.
He said with a view to maximising the utilisation of judges' available time and court room facilities, the Judiciary had in fact been taking the following measures :
(a) listing urgent and short cases to fill time slots vacated at short notice; and
(b) overbooking judges' diaries so that more cases are packed within the available time.
"While these measures have brought improvement, it is simply not possible to fill all unexpected vacant time slots as sufficient time (at least 24 hours) has to be allowed for parties or witnesses to prepare themselves. Moreover, to ask parties, counsel and witnesses to get ready, come to court and stand by but ending in their cases not being heard could waste their time and money," the spokesman said.
Regarding to suggestion that cases could be listed in terms of morning and afternoon sessions, the spokesman said that such arrangement was not necessary for magistracies and tribunals, given the nature and volume of the cases they dealt with.
"Such recommendation was not acceptable for the District Court and High Court.
"Because trials in the District Court and the High Court usually last more than a day, the effect of half-day listing may necessitate parties to return on more days, resulting in inconvenience and costs to them.
"Also, this option is not acceptable professionally as it would involve a judge in dealing with more than one case at the same time. The required concentration and continuity of thoughts in the trial throughout its duration would be seriously affected," the spokesman explained.
The spokesman clarified that it was not the Judiciary's policy for each judge be given his own court room permanently.
"At present there are 180 judges and judicial officers and an addition of 26 temporary judges and judicial officers using 186 court rooms," the spokesman added.
End/Wednesday, March 29, 2000
NNNN