Opinion | Trust our jurors to do their job without prejudice
Cliff Buddle says the row over the Lamma ferry report is a reminder that we should have faith in jurors to do their job properly
Trial by jury is a cherished feature of our criminal justice system. The use of ordinary people to decide the guilt or innocence of those facing serious criminal charges acts as a safeguard against abuse and involves the public in the trial process.
Why, then, do those responsible for our justice system not place more trust in the jury? The decision to reveal only a brief summary of the 430-page government report on the 2012 Lamma ferry disaster has been justified on the grounds that to do otherwise would prejudice future criminal proceedings.
The legal system in Hong Kong and elsewhere in the common law world seeks to tightly restrict the information available to jurors both before and during a trial
The contents of the report, which found suspected criminality and identified 17 marine department officials as being potentially guilty of misconduct, could make any subsequent trial unfair, top government lawyers have warned.
The failure to release it has understandably angered relatives of the 39 victims who lost their lives. It has also prompted former High Court judge William Waung Sik-ying to call for the report to be published in the public interest. The argument that this would jeopardise criminal proceedings "does not wash", said Waung.
The right to a fair trial must be respected. No one would want officials to walk free from court because a judge has decided publication of the report made a fair trial impossible. But this is unlikely to happen. We have, in the past, seen defendants in high-profile cases put forward such arguments and fail. They include milkshake murderer Nancy Kissel, and notorious gangster Yip Kai-foon. In both cases, the courts decided jurors would, if properly directed by the judge, be able to reach a fair verdict based only on the evidence presented to them in court.
Director of Public Prosecutions Keith Yeung Kar-hung cited the case of Malaysian Tycoon Lee Ming Tee, whose case was halted by a judge because part of a government report relating to his case had been published. The Court of Final Appeal later criticised the release of the excerpt, but still concluded a fair trial was possible. He was jailed for a year in 2004.