Foreign judges can help Hong Kong plug its gaps and ensure speedier trials

When British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson issued the United Kingdom’s latest six-monthly report on Hong Kong last month, he said that the “one country, two systems” formula “generally functions well”. He added that Hong Kong’s judiciary “remains in high esteem”, which was timely, not least because several retired British politicians and satraps made some scurrilous attacks on our judges last year.

The judiciary, having recognised that a lack of judges was affecting the waiting time for trials in the Court of First Instance of the High Court, has taken steps to improve the conditions of judges’ service. Plans to raise the retirement age of senior judges from 65 to 70 have also been announced. Only time will tell if these measures will succeed. In the meantime, the problem of delayed trials, particularly in the Court of First Instance, where the most serious cases are heard, remains a concern.

In 2017, the court’s criminal caseload was 449, down from 497 in 2016 and 503 in 2015. However, defendants whose trials were listed on the court’s criminal fixture list, which covers cases assigned a specific trial date, still had to wait an average 164 days for their trials, notwithstanding the judiciary’s target time of 120 days. As for the defendants whose cases were listed on the court’s criminal running list, which covers simpler cases tried only once a judge becomes available, their average waiting time was 111 days, well above the 90-day target.