Everyone's angry - yet again. This time people are enraged that a judge didn't jail a rich girl for slapping a policeman. They believe our justice system favours the wealthy. But we need to straighten something out. Are people angry that a rich girl got off? Or are they angry that she got off because she's a rich girl?
There's a huge difference. Maybe the people are mostly angry because Amina Bokhary got off even though it's her third offence, rich or poor aside? It's important we pin it down.
If the people feel the judge was too lenient despite Bokhary's record of attacking police officers then we're saying he's incompetent. We're also interfering with his independence to rule as he sees fit. If people are angry that her wealth got her off then we're saying our justice system bows blatantly to the rich. If people are angry that her family connections saved her then we're saying our justice system is corrupt.
All of those things jab at the very heart of our much-touted rule of law. Such is the fallout from the Bokhary ruling that most people you talk to are now convinced our justice system is biased towards the elite class.
I am still waiting for Justice Secretary Wong Yan-lung to publicly assure us otherwise. Maybe he wants to preserve his image as the phantom of the government.
Public outrage has forced his department to appeal against magistrate Anthony Yuen Wai-ming's soft treatment of Bokhary. But how does that reverse the belief that our courts are buddies with the big guys? If anything, it makes things even worse.
Sure, let's hold our anger so that the judicial process can run its course, as calmer voices have urged. Justice will prevail in the end. Really? Let's face facts. Would the government have even appealed against the magistrate's ruling if the public hadn't so shrilly shouted foul?