*******************************
Following is a question by the Hon Martin Lee and a written reply by the Secretary for Home Affairs, Mr Patrick Ho (in the absence of the Secretary for Commerce, Industry and Technology), in the Legislative Council today (May 30):
Question:
I have learnt that an organisation, which was formed by Obscene Articles Tribunal (OAT) adjudicators and referred to as the "Association of Adjudicators for Obscene and Indecent Articles" by the media, had publicly expressed its views on the articles submitted to OAT for classification, and had publicly assessed the adjudication results before OAT made its adjudication. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether:
(a) it has studied if the above expression of views and making of assessments by the organisation may affect the fairness and justice of the judicial adjudication made by OAT; if it has studied the issue, of the results and whether it has followed up the issue; if it has not followed up the issue, the reasons for that; if it has not studied the issue, the reasons for that; and
(b) it has formulated guidelines regarding OAT adjudicators' acts such as publicly commenting on articles submitted to OAT for classification, or publicly assessing the adjudication results; if so, of the details of the guidelines; if not, whether it will consider formulating relevant guidelines?
Reply:
Madam President,
The Administration has consulted the Judiciary and provides the reply as follows:
(a) The Association of Adjudicators for Obscene and Indecent Articles referred to by the Hon Martin Lee has no connection with the Obscene Articles Tribunal of the Judiciary.
At present, the Tribunal has 320 adjudicators on its Panel. The overwhelming majority of them sit three times or less in a year. The adjudicators enjoy the right and freedom of speech. However, it is important that where they comment publicly on matters before the Tribunal, they should exercise considerable caution. It is important that the integrity and impartiality of the Tribunal should not be compromised.
In the event that a Tribunal adjudicator has made public comments on matters before the Tribunal, the Judiciary's position is that the adjudicator concerned will be disqualified from sitting on the Tribunal in the matter in question. In this context, the appropriate test is that an adjudicator is disqualified from sitting if the circumstances are such as would lead a reasonable, fair-minded and well-informed observer to conclude that there is a real possibility that the adjudicator would be biased. Whether the adjudicator concerned will be disqualified from sitting in a similar case in the future will have to be considered by applying this test to the circumstances of the case in question.
(b) The Judiciary will ensure that the adjudicators understand the test and that the test is applied. There are at present no guidelines regarding adjudicators' acts such as publicly commenting on matters before the Tribunal. Apart from ensuring that the adjudicators understand the test and that the test is applied, the Judiciary at present does not intend to promulgate such guidelines. However, the need for such guidelines will be kept under review.
Ends/Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Issued at HKT 12:51
NNNN
