|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
Petition to the Chief Executive under Section 83P of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance
In view of comments received from the reviews on the Scheme under Section 26A of the Legal Aid Ordinance conducted in 2003 and 2004, Council made proposal to the Administration in 2004 to refine the Scheme by extending its scope to cover petition to the Chief Executive (CE) under Section 83P of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance (CPO).
Since the commencement of the Scheme, there were applications where the counsel preparing the certificate considered that a petition to CE should be made under Section 83P of CPO. However, assistance could not be provided by Council nor the Legal Aid Department (LAD) because this would be beyond the scope of the Scheme and of the legal aid services provided by LAD. Council proposed that assistance be provided to a convicted person who satisfied LAD's means test and had a deserving case.
In June 2005, the Director of Administration provided her comments to Council. The Administration appreciated that in putting forward the proposal Council had taken account of the need to maintain the cost effective use of public funds.
As the Controlling Officer in respect of legal aid expenditure, the Director of Legal Aid (DLA) has agreed to provide legal aid funding, through the Council, to assist those who seek a review under Section 26A of the Legal Aid Ordinance, insofar as the review arises from and is pertinent to his decision or order. In a similar vein, the Administration was trying to better understand the legal aid perspective pertinent to the proposal for DLA to also fund Section 83P Petitions on the ground of relevance and necessity.
Furthermore, notwithstanding that the intention was to restrict legal aid funding to those Section 83P Petitions which had participated in the Section 26A Scheme, the Administration would have to justify, in upholding equality before the law, the discernment of the selected Section 83P petitions that might be legally aided, against other Section 83P petitions from petitioners without such assistance. The disparity treatment might not be readily appreciated by the public without justifications.
The Administration's comments were being considered by the LAD.
|
|
|
|
|
