image image

Traffic and road safety in Hong Kong

Hong Kong police denied the chance to respond to lawmakers on ‘human shield’ chase drivers

PUBLISHED : Monday, 16 April, 2018, 3:20pm
UPDATED : Monday, 16 April, 2018, 10:27pm

Your front-page article, “‘Human shield’ chase drivers may be prosecuted” (April 14), reported that three motorists who were injured – allegedly after following police orders to slow their vehicles to help stop a car chase – had been issued with formal notices of intended prosecution; and that legislator James To Kun-sun berated the issuing of the notices as “brainless”.

The article went on to say that, “Deputy security minister Sonny Au Chi-kwong and Martin Cadman, chief superintendent at police traffic headquarters, did not have an opportunity to respond as they ran out of time”.

Having watched the broadcast of the Legislative Council security panel meeting in question, I wish to put matters in the right perspective.

Messrs Au and Cadman “ran out of time” because Mr To and his fellow pan-democrat legislators all used their four-minute time limit to fire their loaded questions, or otherwise vent their spleen on the government representatives.

Hong Kong motorist in police ‘human shield’ accident feels ‘wronged’ by prosecution notice

On one or two occasions, when Mr Cadman was starting to answer the questions, he was interrupted by the legislators’ further criticism and questions until the four minutes expired.

To be fair to the government’s representatives, legislator Gary Chan Hak-kan, who chaired the meeting, should have allowed extra time for the government to respond. He did not.

Another unfair aspect was that the disgruntled legislators were all assuming that the facts as they believed were the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Since the matter was still under investigation, the government representatives had to do what reasonable people should, that is, refrain from disclosing those details required to counter the legislators’ allegations.

Yet, the legislators apparently regarded the representatives’ self-restraint as an admission of guilt.

These legislators are the same people who, uttering “procedural justice” as their mantra, set themselves up as the guardians of fairness and justice in Hong Kong.

Ng Hon Wah, Pok Fu Lam