Hong Kong judge criticises gov’t over delay in legal aid for activist’s challenge against San Tin tech hub
Hong Kong Free Press
A Hong Kong judge has criticised the government over its delay in processing a legal aid application relating to a challenge over a planned tech hub.
After rejecting activist Eddie Tse’s application to suspend proceedings in a legal challenge against a planned tech hub on Monday, Judge Russell Coleman in a judgement published on Wednesday suggested that the Legal Aid Department “deal with the legal aid application more expeditiously.”
Tse has sought to challenge environmental authorities’ approval of a report on the development of the San Tin Technopole. The plan to build a 600-hectare tech hub near the city’s border with Shenzhen has sparked concerns over its impact on wetlands and endangered species that frequent them.
The High Court on Monday heard that Tse applied for legal aid in August, immediately after a judge approved his judicial review application. But Tse had received no response from the Legal Aid Department in nearly three months, the defence said.
Tse applied for legal aid services on August 14 and had submitted all documents to the Legal Aid Department by the end of that month. The three-month period for processing applications ends on Thursday.
Coleman acknowledged that “there is no suggestion that there has been any failure by the applicant to give timely provision of information relating to merits of the case.”
According to the Legal Aid Regulations, legal procedures are suspended for 42 days from the date that a legal aid application is filed. Following that window, procedures will begin and the applicant will incur legal fees.
Public interest
Coleman ruled on Wednesday that the “important public interest in the expeditious disposal” of Tse’s legal challenge meant that proceedings could not be put on hold.
“Matters relating to the protection of the environment are matters of public interest. Similarly, matters relating to infrastructure and other government development projects, including the provision of residential and commercial accommodation, are also matters of public interest,” he said.
Granting a 14-day stay of proceedings was “of little benefit,” Coleman said, as Tse might apply for an extension of that suspension if the legal aid application was not processed in that period.
Judge Coleman also criticised the government’s handling of Tse’s legal aid application, singling out a letter by Assistant Principal Legal Aid Counsel Emily Ho, in which she asked Tse and his legal team to refrain from making “repeated and unnecessary enquiries” about the status of the application.
Coleman wrote: “[T]here is room for thinking that the letter is a little unattractive and simply rather unhelpful.”
He added that Ho had treated Tse’s legal aid application as “run-of-the-mill,” without giving regard to the “matters of public interest” and “degree of urgency” arising from Tse’s legal challenge.
“I even expressed the assumption – which turns out to have been over-optimistic and misplaced – that the legal aid application could be determined within a reasonably short time from 7 October 2024,” Coleman said.
‘If a fuse needs to be lit’
There was a need to expedite cases involving matters of public interest, Coleman said on Wednesday.
“The best way to achieve that is to continue to encourage the Director to apply the necessary resources to deal with the legal aid application more expeditiously. If a fuse needs to be lit somewhere, it should be lit,” Coleman wrote.
He added: “This particular piece of litigation is both more urgent and engages more public interest issues than many others even in the public law sphere.”
Tse said in a Wednesday statement that the Legal Aid Department had “no reason” to further delay the processing of his application. He added that the department should review its existing mechanisms to ensure that no one who is eligible for legal aid is denied access to justice due to a lack of funds.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
.wp-block-newspack-blocks-homepage-articles article .entry-title {
font-size: 1.2em;
}
.wp-block-newspack-blocks-homepage-articles .entry-meta {
display: flex;
flex-wrap: wrap;
align-items: center;
margin-top: 0.5em;
}
.wp-block-newspack-blocks-homepage-articles article .entry-meta {
font-size: 0.8em;
}
.wp-block-newspack-blocks-homepage-articles article .avatar {
height: 25px;
width: 25px;
}
.wp-block-newspack-blocks-homepage-articles .post-thumbnail{
margin: 0;
margin-bottom: 0.25em;
}
.wp-block-newspack-blocks-homepage-articles .post-thumbnail img {
height: auto;
width: 100%;
}
.wp-block-newspack-blocks-homepage-articles .post-thumbnail figcaption {
margin-bottom: 0.5em;
}
.wp-block-newspack-blocks-homepage-articles p {
margin: 0.5em 0;
}
HKFP has an impartial stance, transparent funding, and balanced coverage guided by an Ethics Code and Corrections Policy.
Support press freedom & help us surpass 1,000 monthly Patrons: 100% independent, governed by an ethics code & not-for-profit.