Opinion

Judicial safety: a necessity, not a luxury

In the wake of the criticism faced by a Hong Kong judge who jailed seven police officers for the assault of activist Ken Tsang, Grenville Cross SC outlines the importance of judicial safety in Hong Kong

2-MIN READ2-MIN

A judge has faced backlash over the jailing of seven police officers. Photo: Nora Tam

Grenville Cross SC is a criminal justice analyst, a barrister (senior counsel), and a life senator of the International Association of Prosecutors (IAP).

Published: 2:04pm, 6 Mar 2017Updated: 9:05pm, 6 Mar 2017

Much is said these days about the importance of an independent judiciary, but more also needs to be said about judicial security. To do their jobs properly, judges, like prosecutors, must know they are fully protected, and should not have to constantly look over their shoulders.

Integral to judicial safety is, of course, respect, but this is all too often lacking these days.

After a District Court judge convicted seven police officers of assaulting activist Ken Tsang Kin-chiu, he faced a barrage of criticism, much of it scurrilous and even dangerous. He was described on social media as a “dog judge”, who was biased by virtue of having taken money from the Civic Party, of which Tsang was once a member.

By any yardstick, this criticism was excessive, but certainly not unprecedented. Magistrates, for example, have also faced abusive attacks over their handling of prosecutions arising out of the street protests of 2014, with allegations that they were biased against the police and sympathetic to the protesters who caused mayhem on the streets in the name of democracy.

Judges are certainly not immune from criticism, but if it goes over the top those responsible may face prosecution for contempt of court, with possible imprisonment. Although this may discourage some people from abusing the judiciary, there is no sure means of quantifying what impact inflammatory language has on the more impressionable members of society, let alone the unbalanced.