S for S speaks on judicial review on foreign domestic helpers' right of abode in HK
******************************************************

     Following is the transcript of remarks (English portion) by the Secretary for Security, Mr Ambrose S K Lee, at a media session on the judicial review on foreign domestic helpers' right of abode in Hong Kong at Central Government Offices, Tamar, this afternoon (March 28):

Secretary for Security: In September last year, the Court of First Instance ruled against the Government in the judicial review on right of abode lodged by a foreign domestic helper. The Government had appealed against this ruling, and the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment this morning.

     The Court of Appeal accepted the Government's arguments and unanimously allowed the appeal. The Court of Appeal affirmed that section 2(4)(a)(vi) of the Immigration Ordinance is consistent with Article 24(2)(4) of the Basic Law concerning the criteria of persons not of Chinese nationality being Hong Kong permanent residents.

     The Government welcomes the judgment of the Court of Appeal. After consideration, the Government has decided to maintain our position to withhold processing right of abode applications submitted by foreign domestic helpers.

     We believe that the judicial review applicant will likely apply for leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment to the Court of Final Appeal. Therefore, at this stage, the Government will not regard the Court of Appeal judgment as the final determination of the relevant legal issue. To process right of abode applications by foreign domestic helpers at this stage will result in confusion, particularly because the Government anticipates that the present litigation will likely proceed to the Court of Final Appeal.

     We consider that a more prudent approach is for the Immigration Department to continue to withhold processing right of abode applications submitted by foreign domestic helpers until final determination of the constitutionality of section 2(4)(a)(vi) of the Immigration Ordinance, including:

(1) the judicial review applicant does not seek to appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment within the statutory time limit; or

(2) the applicant seeks to appeal but is not granted leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal; or

(3) by way of the Court of Final Appeal hearing, there is a final determination of the law in question in accordance with the Basic Law.

     As the case involves an important constitutional issue and immense public interest, if the judicial review applicant is granted leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal, the Government will make its best endeavours to present cogent arguments to the Court of Final Appeal with a view to obtaining a favourable judgment. The Government will also invite the Court of Final Appeal to expedite the hearing with a view to obtaining a final determination of the law in question as soon as possible.

     As the Court of Appeal has ruled that the relevant provision of the Immigration Ordinance is consistent with the Basic Law, at this stage, the Government will not change the existing arrangements for the entry and employment of foreign domestic helpers. The Government will continue to process visa applications from foreign domestic helpers in accordance with the prevailing policy, and the household care and domestic arrangements of families having foreign domestic helpers will not be affected.

Reporter: How many applications have been ....

Secretary for Security: Up to, I think, the 23rd of this month, 901 applications have been received and pending further processing.

Reporter: If the Government loses in CFA (Court of Final Appeal), will it consider interpretation (of the Basic Law)?

Secretary for Security: I think we have not yet arrived at this stage. We anticipate the judicial review applicant will likely appeal to the Court of Final Appeal. When it comes to that stage, we will consider our litigation strategy.

Reporter: But is there a possibility?

Secretary for Security: I think these days, there are lots of opinions, arguments and comments on amending the Basic Law, interpretation of the Basic Law by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. These are very controversial issues. I don't think the Government will make a decision very lightly, so not at this stage. The interpretation or the amendment of the Basic Law has not yet come to our horizon.

Reporter: Will you consider serving another term as Secretary for Security?

Secretary for Security: This is a question that I would not like to answer at this stage.

(Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the transcript.)

Ends/Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Issued at HKT 19:27

NNNN