Court Warns Against VIP Parade During Jury Trials

The High Court on Tuesday sounded a warning about the danger of orchestrating the presence of well-known figures during jury trials in criminal proceedings, and said it may be time for Hong Kong to consider judge-only trials when there is a danger of jury tampering.

Judge Andrew Chan made these observations while revealing his reasons for discharging a juror in the second bribery trial of former chief executive Donald Tsang.

He said during the trial, former colleagues – including former ministers and current and former Legco members from both sides of the political divide – as well as prominent religious figures were taken into court by a PR firm or consultant to sit in seats reserved for Tsang's family and friends.

Justice Chan said family and friends are perfectly entitled to observe proceedings and show support ... but they, or any other person, cannot try to exert any influence on the jury.

He said the objective of bringing these prominent figures to sit in the reserved seats was "undoubtedly" to inform and impress upon the jury that Tsang was a good person and had the support of people from across the whole spectrum of society.

He said the defence had decided to introduce good character evidence "through the back door".

Tsang had at this point already been convicted in an earlier trial, so any good character evidence introduced by the defence could be rebutted by the prosecution.

He said there's no direct evidence to suggest the PR firm or consultant had been engaged by Tsang himself, but the inference is "overwhelming" and it would be an affront to common sense to conclude that Tsang hadn't consented, acquiesced or otherwise been involved.

The jury in Tsang's second trial was unable to reach a majority verdict on the bribery charge and prosecutors decided against prosecuting him for a third time.

Towards the end of that trial, a juror – a man surnamed Kiu – was discharged by the judge after he was seen talking to columnist and radio presenter Chip Tsao, a known supporter of Tsang, during a lunch adjournment.

Tsao had made known his views about the trial publicly on social media. He had been brought into court on that day by a public relations representative, and sat in an area reserved for Tsang’s family and friends.

The juror said he was a follower of Tsao and they only discussed casual matters. But after listening to concerns from the prosecution, Judge Chan agreed to discharge the juror.

He said the juror was a supporter of a known backer of the defendant, and this raised a real possibility he could not be fair minded in the way he approached the case.

Justice Chan said this was when he first realised the involvement of a PR firm or consultant in the trial. If this been brought to his attention earlier, he might have considered discharging the entire jury, Chan said.

He added that in England there are specific provisions that allows judge-only trials where there is a danger of jury tampering. But no such equivalent provision exists in Hong Kong.

He said it's therefore no surprise that in recent years, when the wealthy and powerful were charged for criminal offences, they've tried all kinds of means and ways to list their cases in the High Court before a jury.