'Bad Precedent' To Pull Judge From Protest Cases

Pro-government lawmaker Priscilla Leung on Wednesday warned that the judiciary’s decision to bar a District Court judge from hearing any further cases relating to anti-government protests could have a major knock-on effect on thousands of similar cases waiting to go to court.

The judiciary had on Monday said District Court Judge Kwok Wai-kin would no longer handle any more protest-related cases, three days after he handed down a controversial judgement on a man who admitted to stabbing three people at a pro-democracy ‘Lennon Wall’ last August.

Kwok had described the attacker as a ‘victim’ of the anti-government protests, and likened protesters to a ‘terrorist army’.

However, the judiciary didn’t give a full explanation of its decision, saying only that the chief district judge had “noted” that Judge Kwok’s judgement has led to “controversial discussions” in the community.

Leung said a much clearer explanation is needed, or judges who are perceived to be other pro- or anti-protest could also risk being barred from hearing such cases in future.

“What would happen to these other 6,000 or so cases which are queuing up?”, she queried.

“There would certainly be a lot of similar situations happening so what would be their system? Are they going to change judges frequently or what?” she asked.

Leung – who’s also a barrister – said comments made by judges when deciding whether or not to accept mitigation pleas from defendants is different in nature from them expressing a purely political stance.

“I think there will be a lot of cases where judges are extremely likely to express his opinions [on mitigation pleas]. This is not the same as a political stance”, she insisted.

Leung also queried why the judiciary’s move came so quickly, noting that they are not known for reacting so swiftly.

She further questioned whether judges who had made statements that were seen as favouring the protests were likewise barred from hearing such cases.

Leung, who said she has received numerous public complaints over the matter, said Legco’s Administration of Justice and Legal Services panel – which she chairs – will follow up on the matter, and seek clarification from the judiciary on whether it considered the future impact of its decision.