Advertisement
Advertisement

Legal aid watchdog pursues new blood

Elaine Wu

Legal-aid monitors want to expand their advisory board to include representatives of consumer, social services and accounting sectors.

This would give the Legal Aid Services Council, whose membership now is largely made up of lawyers, a broader input of opinions, council chairman Lee Jark-pui said.

Specifically, he wants members from the Council of Social Service, Association of Social Workers and the Consumer Council to join the council, which monitors the work of the Legal Aid Department.

'The people applying for legal aid are consumers and the Consumer Council has daily experience with them, so we want their feedback,' he said.

The government was planning to submit amendments to the Legal Aid Services Council Ordinance next year to expand the number of council members from 10 to 14, Mr Lee said.

Having more council members would also make it easier to reach the council's quorum of seven for meetings.

If fewer than seven members were present, the council was not empowered to make any decisions, Mr Lee said.

The amendments also would include changes to give the council powers to hire its own staff and enter into contracts with a third party.

Until recently, the council's seven members have come from the civil service.

It receives an annual budget of $5 million from the government to pay salaries and rent.

The council receives quarterly reports from the Legal Aid Department and gives advice to the government on legal-aid policies.

It has tried to push for more independence in the past by proposing the creation of an independent legal-aid body, which would have included the council, the Legal Aid Department and the duty lawyer service. But this was rejected by the government.

In its recent recommendations to the administration, the council suggested allowing officers of a residential owners' corporation to apply for legal aid.

The council argued that this would allow the officers to take legal action in a personal capacity when flat owners violated the Building Management Ordinance or Deed of Mutual Covenant. No action has yet been taken on the suggestion.

Post