Legal figures welcome decision not to prosecute following investigation into criminal claims by magistrate against chief justice and colleagues
CHRIS LAUchris.lau@scmp.com
PUBLISHED : Friday, 16 October, 2015, 12:00am
UPDATED : Friday, 16 October, 2015, 12:00am
Former magistrate Symon Wong Yu-wing.Photo: SCMP Pictures
The Hong Kong legal community yesterday said the Department of Justice's decision not to prosecute the chief justice and two senior magistrates - accused by another magistrate of criminal misconduct over their handling of a complaint - was the best way the saga could have played out.
The department announced on Wednesday night it would not pursue the case of former magistrate Symon Wong Yu-wing, who accused Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li, Chief Magistrate Clement Lee Hing-nin, and Principal Magistrate Bernadette Woo Huey-fang of perverting the course of justice.
University of Hong Kong law professor Simon Young felt the affair had reached a satisfactory outcome. He said the DOJ had acted as an independent body, looking into the case and reaching a clear view that nothing problematic had occurred from a point of criminal law.
Senior counsel Ronny Tong Ka-wah said the department did what it had to do with the public interest in mind, in what was a rare situation.
Wong revoked bail for a defendant facing drug charges at Eastern Court last July. But his decision drew criticism from Deputy Judge Michael Stuart-Moore when the defendant reapplied for bail before him.
Wong then complained by email to the chief justice and demanded an investigation, with the email being copied to Woo and Lee.
But Woo, whom the department referred to as Wong's friend at the time, advised him to soften his tone, to which Wong agreed. She asked him to allow "a very capable" person, whom Wong was later told was Lee, to draft a letter for him, Wong alleged.
Wong was unhappy after noting that the draft letter included an apology and some details suggesting that he accepted responsibility for his decision to revoke bail. The letter was eventually sent to Ma, in the form of an email, minus the apology
Wong alleged that the letter was actually written by Ma, who wanted to avoid the inquiry he had called for into Stuart-Moore.
After obtaining opinion from Queen's Counsel in Britain, the department concluded that Wong agreed to the content of the email before voluntarily sending it.
The department also came to the conclusion that the allegations against Ma were groundless, while there was nothing unlawful about Woo and Lee persuading Wong to withdraw his complaints.
Following the DOJ's highly unusual move of publishing in detail its reasons for not prosecuting the legal figures, the judiciary yesterday said cases involving judges complaining about colleagues were "extremely rare". It said that if such a complaint was made, it would normally be handled personally by the chief justice and relevant court leaders.
"The Department of Justice's normal practice is not to go into details of a criminal complaint other than in the course of a criminal trial," the department said.
But it decided to go public "in light of exceptional circumstances" as the allegations had been made against members of the judiciary.
Woo and Lee made no further comments yesterday.
http://m.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-crime/article/1868208/hong-kongs-department-justice-reached-right-decision-not
