bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

sponsorType

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

SCMP Reporter

LAWYERS are forced to discuss cases with their clients in prison corridors within earshot of police and other detainees because interview rooms in magistrates' courts are inadequate.

  The administrator of the government-funded Duty Lawyer Scheme, Grace Wong Jin-li, described the situation as highly undesirable since it led to a breach of confidentiality.

  Ms Wong said among the 10 magistrates' courts the scheme served, Fanling, Western, South Kowloon, and North Kowloon were particularly bad.

  There is only one interview room in North Kowloon Court - the busiest of all the courts.

  On average, duty lawyers have to stand outside the main gate of the cell to take instructions from their clients two days a week when private lawyers are using the interview room.

  Duty lawyers and their clients are separated by the bars while they talk since the defendants are not allowed out of the restricted area of the prison.

  Entire interviews were conducted with all parties concerned standing up, and they were often interrupted when the gate had to be opened for prisoners to be transferred to and from court, Ms Wong said.

  ''It is a ridiculous situation.''   The Bar Association and the Law Society, whose members provide services to the Duty Lawyer Scheme, will meet in September to press the Judiciary to improve the facilities.

  Ms Wong called for two interview rooms at each court.

  She said scheme lawyers looked after about 30,000 clients last year - most of whom could not afford private lawyers.

  Clients only pay $300 handling fees if they are eligible for the assistance of the scheme by having an annual gross income of less than $90,000.

  Ms Wong said since the only interview room in North Kowloon Court was closed two years ago, lawyers had to stand outside the cell to take instructions every day.

  The room has been re-opened recently after their complaints, but duty lawyers still find it hard to operate since they have about 10 clients on remand every day.

  Duty lawyers working in Fanling have to conduct interviews inside the restricted area of the prison where they are provided with a table and two chairs.

  Discussions of cases are within earshot of police as well as other detainees since the table is placed closed to a cell.

  ''This inevitably leads to breaches of confidentiality during client interviews. The conversation between the client and his lawyer is supposed to be privileged. Many defendants also feel very intimidated by the police presence,'' Ms Wong said.

  The problem also exists in the Western and South Kowloon courts, which have only one interview room each.

  There are about six to 10 remand cases every day in Western. If the interview room is occupied, they can either use a desk in the corridor outside an empty cell or a bench outside the interview room.

        In South Kowloon, duty lawyers are given a room split in two by a wooden partition.



Facilities in courts criticised