Henry Litton’s recent opinion piece was intriguing and inspiring (“For Hong Kong’s judiciary, whether English will remain an official language beyond 2047 is the question”, October 16 ). Hong Kong’s legal system is inclusive. Following a historical encounter some 200 years ago that made it different from the rest of China, this city has adopted British common law, the Basic Law and now the national security law. As a hub of international arbitration, Hong Kong has been the jurisdiction of choice for parties seeking resolution to a legal dispute. Litton raised a very important question of whether English will still be used as the legal language after 2047. As we don’t have a crystal ball, how can we tell? For those in the legal profession, their lingua franca is actually the legal language, the full meaning of which a lay audience can struggle to understand. Britain is not considered a tea-producing country, but you can buy Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Indian or Sri Lankan tea in London. The common law was transplanted to Hong Kong from a foreign land many miles away, but it germinated, took root and bore fruit. Should Hong Kong be a place where clients from all over the world can choose the legal system they need? It could bring lucrative business opportunities to our legal community. In this sense, it is necessary to use English as a legal language. In closing, l would like to quote from the Diamond Sutra: “All conditioned phenomena are like a dream, an illusion, a bubble, a shadow, like dew or a flash of lightning; thus we shall perceive them.” We should hold the view that all the laws drafted by humans, whether they are common law or the Basic Law, are just like a dream, a bubble or dew. It means they might one day be repealed. For now, the use of English as the legal language is practical and pragmatic. And if it is lucrative, you can’t easily replace it. Lo Wai Kong, Lai Chi Kok Quarantine rules a threat to residents’ mental health If Hong Kong continues to remain under a pandemic policy of fear, it will ultimately affect our children psychologically. We cannot raise children in fear of a disease that does not appear to be a threat to children globally. Our tough standards while the rest of the world opens up its borders will eventually lead to psychological impairment among residents. I don’t believe Hong Kong is a world-class city any more, given the travel policy towards fully vaccinated residents. The people of Hong Kong need to overcome the fear of Covid-19 and be allowed to travel and return without quarantine if they are fully vaccinated. Our pandemic policy is extreme. It’s not about the economy any more, it’s about mental health among residents. Hong Kong is now a luxury jail for residents as every returnee faces some form of quarantine. Rishi Teckchandani, Mid-Levels Hong Kong quarantine policy overlooks Basic Law In the ongoing debate about the constitutional rights and obligations applicable in Hong Kong under the Basic Law, it seems the government’s continued insistence on a draconian hotel quarantine regime is unsupported by the latest medical science. The excessive 21-day period overlooks four key provisions of the Basic Law that are integral to the raison d’être of Hong Kong itself. First, Article 109 requires the government to implement an appropriate economic and legal environment to ensure Hong Kong is an international financial centre. Second, Article 114 states that Hong Kong is to be a free port. Third, Article 119 requires the government to formulate policies to promote the development of commerce, tourism and transport, among other things. Fourth, Article 128 requires the government to implement policies to ensure Hong Kong is a centre of international and regional aviation. These are all uncontroversial propositions reflecting the best attributes of Hong Kong that make it a city of international significance and deliver prosperity to all those fortunate enough to live here. As the rest of the world opens up and rival financial centres abandon the shackles of lockdown, the failure of the government to adopt a more pragmatic approach to international travel and quarantine restrictions risks jeopardising Hong Kong’s competitiveness as an international financial centre, free port and aviation hub. The likes of Singapore, Sydney, London and Bangkok would all relish the chance to steal a slice of the economic pie from Hong Kong, whether it be in financial services, aviation or the many other sectors that are predicated on a city being open to the world. Hong Kong has done well in insulating its citizenry from the worst of the pandemic, achieving a low death toll and a vaccination rate that is well above the global rate. We must not rest on our laurels but instead adapt our policy settings to ensure Hong Kong remains competitive and ahead of the pack. Nicholas Tam, Sai Ying Pun Northern Metropolis plan faces many hurdles I am writing in response to the editorial, “Transparency key if Northern Metropolis is to become a reality” ( October 11 ). Despite the seriousness of the housing problem in Hong Kong, there are still several barriers to developing land in the north. First, the proposed development areas are next to the Mai Po nature reserve , which is considered environmentally vulnerable. Construction inevitably produces sound and air pollution which will destroy the original habitat there. The government should strike a balance between development and conservation, perhaps by lowering building density. Also, most of the land in the area is privately owned. The implementation of the Lands Resumption Ordinance by the government could face a series of judicial reviews, which would hinder development. The government might end up negotiating with the land holders for a long period of time. That is simply not ideal for tackling the housing problem. Wai-hai Lo, Tuen Mun