Editorial | Appeals push against verdicts must respect rights of Hong Kong defendants
- Proposals allowing prosecutors to appeal against the verdicts of judges in national security cases need to be carefully considered
The ability to appeal against verdicts is an important feature of any reputable criminal justice system. Defendants convicted in Hong Kong generally enjoy a right to challenge their guilty verdicts in the higher courts.
But the prosecution has a more limited power to contest decisions made by the Court of First Instance, where the most serious cases are tried. Not guilty verdicts cannot be revoked and retrials ordered. This is because those verdicts are usually delivered by juries.
The position has led to what the Department of Justice describes as an anomaly in national security cases, which can be tried by a panel of judges instead of a jury. The prosecution is still unable to challenge an acquittal and seek a retrial.
Now, the government has proposed changing the law to allow for appeals by the prosecution in such cases. This would extend a power that already exists for trials in the magistrates’ and district courts, whether involving national security or not.
Judges, unlike juries, provide reasons for their decisions. The reasoning can be assessed and, if viewed as legally incorrect, provide a basis for an appeal.
In principle, it makes sense to allow the prosecution to challenge such decisions in national security cases.