Translate

June 25, 2016

Legal bid re-ignites airport favouritism row over Hong Kong leader and the bag his daughter left behind

Trio of flight attendants mount court challenge claiming security rules were breached to please city’s top family

CHRIS.LAU@SCMP.COM

UPDATED : Saturday, 25 June, 2016, 2:49pm

Members of Democratic Party staged a protest outside the Central Government Office in April against CY Leung allegedly pressuring airport staff in bag row . Photo: Nora Tam

Three Hong Kong flight attendants are making a legal bid which looks set to re-ignite the favouritism row which engulfed Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying and his family over a bag his daughter left behind at the city’s airport.

The trio of Hong Kong Dragon Airlines flight attendants want to overturn a ruling by the Hong Kong Airport Authority that security was not breached when a bag the leader’s daughter left behind at check-in was delivered to her at a boarding gate.

Hong Kong Airport Authority issues report denying any safety breach for chief executive’s daughter in left-luggage row

In a High Court writ filed on Friday, flight attendants Law Mei-mei, Cheng Lai-chu and Yiu Wing-shan on Friday, make claims over the incident at Hong Kong International Airport in March.

Then, Leung and his wife Regina Leung Tong Ching-yee were accused of pressuring airport staff to deliver a bag their daughter, Leung Chun-yan, left behind.

The luggage underwent a screening unaccompanied by Leung Chung-yan, before it was eventually delivered to her. The delivery prompted questions that security procedures had been breached.

Hong Kong chief executive denies pressuring airport staff to break security rules over his daughter’s left-behind luggage

Subsequently, the Airport Authority said that while the bag did not go through the usual two-tier examination, it was adequately screened.

However, the flight attendants’ writ says that the government is obliged to comply with the Hong Kong Aviation Security Programme, which states: “All screening of cabin baggage shall be conducted in the presence of the passenger.”

The three flight attendants argue that the clause covered both tiers of the screening process and asks the court to declare the explanation given by the authority “illegal” and “procedurally improper”.

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-crime/article/1981097/legal-bid-re-ignites-airport-favouritism-row-over-hong-kong