LettersChanges to Hong Kong’s legal aid system will stifle effective judicial review

A responsible government does not subordinate or ‘balance’ principle or the law against community comments, especially when the comments are ill-informed

Concentration of practice should not be grounds for restriction because complicated cases will naturally go to a narrower field of specialists

2-MIN READ2-MIN

A statue of Lady Liberty stands atop the Court of Final Appeal in Central in May 2017. Photo: Sam Tsang

Published: 5:30am, 8 Nov 2021

Your editorial “Changes to legal aid system too important to be rushed through” (November 4) is largely on the mark but pulls its punches.

A principal mischief of the measures in the Legislative Council paper is that they will stifle effective judicial review of government action, enshrined in Article 35 of the Hong Kong Basic Law and Article 22 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights.

Judicial review has been described as “the rule of law in action”. These measures are thus an indirect attack on “two systems” and the rule of law.

The paper’s reasons for change do not hold water. First, a responsible government does not subordinate or “balance” principle or the law against community comments, no matter how politically or administratively convenient that may be.

Secondly, the comments relied on are ill-informed, illogical and do not justify the measures.

Concentration of practice is no reason for restriction. For a heart problem, you see a cardiologist, not somebody who sees a few heart patients every year. The more serious or difficult your condition, the narrower the field of specialists. The same in the law.