Your leader ('Australia still owes HK an explanation', February 10) again strongly chastised Justice Minister Chris Ellison for his refusal to return two Australians charged with criminal activity in relation to pilings.
Mention is made of the 'comity of nations' whereby states respect the laws of others. But the laws of this city have changed since 1997. With a government that runs to Beijing for clarification and interpretation, it may be increasingly difficult for other countries to have faith in Hong Kong to fairly conduct any trial. Moreover, it often seems that having a convenient foreigner to condemn is far easier than dealing with the intrigue of Hong Kong and its power masters.
The two men have been proven guilty before trial, according to your leader, but correctly placing responsibility is the long-term answer. The responsibility for building structure conformity is clearly with inspection authorities. Should someone disregard the regulations they should be fined or sent packing there and then, not years later.
I have no idea why Senator Ellison has seen fit to countermand the judicial decision to extradite but he is no doubt a learned man and has obviously been provided with sufficient evidence. Thank heaven there are such checks and balances in Australia's democracy.
The recent history of unbiased legal determinations in Hong Kong is not glorious. A record is emerging of there being one law for the powerful and another for the people. Clearly the judiciary is struggling to retain its independence. I therefore take exception to the vitriolic leader. When the writer manages to vote in this city, his leaders lambasting senators from democratic countries may carry more weight.
G. BADGERY, Sheung Wan