Jury System of Hong Kong - Essay Example

188564 What criticisms are made of the jury system of Hong Kong? What reforms would you suggest?" Within a jury system there are inherent problems. In Hong Kong there is a generalised opinion that juries are not truly representative of the cross section of the community. It was observed in 1986 in a report entitled Report of the Select Committee on the Problems Involved in the Prosecution and Trial of Complex Commercial Crimes that the List of Common Jurors was comprised of the cultural, social and political elite. observed that the List of Common Jurors consists of a cultural, social and political elite1. Mr Derry Wong2 an associate professor at the Faculty of Law, City University of Hong Kong, has described the numbers of those qualifying for jury service as relatively small in comparison to the overall population. In the UK there is a requirement that a defendant is tried by his peers. Hong Kong has no such requirement and it has been generally accepted that the members of the jury are not truly representative of the population of Hong Kong. Amongst the reasons for Hong Kong Juries not being representative of the population revolves around the eligibility criteria. One of the biggest obstacles that used to be placed on jury selection is that any person selected for jury service must have a knowledge of the English language so that they are able to understand the evidence from witnesses as well as the address from counsel and the summing up by the judge. This used to be included as a requirement because English was the language adopted in the courts. Most of the Hong Kong population speak Cantonese and cannot understand English. As a result they were automatically ineligible for jury service. The requirement of the jury to be well versed in the English language had a tendency to have the effect of making it so that the jurors in Hong Kong were highly educated. A judge in Hong Kong, Crudent J commented that “Hong Kong juries are...of very much higher quality than English and other Commonwealth juries ... The Hong Kong juries are invariably very well dressed, attentive and relatively young. The Old Bailey juries generally are far less attentive, of the men only a minority wear ties and the average age is older. These superficial differences are not merely cosmetic, but reflect a substantial difference in the quality of Hong Kong and English juries.” In recent years the system has changed and the eligibility criteria have been amended so that a person can be a juror so long as they have sufficient knowledge of the language of the court. This applies to the English or Chinese language. There are for basic criteria for a juror now. To be eligible the juror must be at least 21 but not over 65, of sound mind with no hearing or visual impairments, of good character and able to understand the language of the court. Although the language criterion has altered to a degree the language requirement is dependent on the case being heard. In some instances it may still be the case that a juror is required to have knowledge of the English language. In these cases the number of eligible jurors is likely to be very restrictive3. The change in the language criteria was brought about as a result of a change in the Basic Law of China. Article 9 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region makes the provision that: In addition to the Chinese language, English may also be used as an official language by the executive authorities, legislature and judiciary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Since 1997 the courts have widened the jury eligibility to include the Chinese language which has meant a larger cross section is now eligible. Although the eligibility criterion above seems fairly widespread the Jury Ordnance provides an extensive list of those who are ineligible, exempt or disqualified from jury service. The list of exempt persons includes medical practitioners and dentists who are registered; members of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons of Great Britain and persons with an approved diploma of a British or foreign veterinary institution and editors of daily newspapers, and their staff (if the Registrar is satisfied that the publication of the newspaper would be disrupted if they served) and chemists and druggist. There are in total 18 categories of people that might be exempt, ineligible or disqualified from serving as a juror4. Within the UK the number of such people is significantly less and in recent times police officers and lawyers have now been used as jurors in the UK. A further problem that can make a jury unrepresentative is that the judge has the power to make an order that a jury shall be composed of men or women only5. Women can also apply to be ineligible under Cap 3 s20 on the grounds of the nature of the evidence or the issue of the case. Within the Hong Kong system the defence counsel has many challenges for cause available and the accused is entitled to five peremptory challenges. As the number of qualifying jurors might be extremely small in number the use of these 5 peremptory challenges is significant as it is easier to obtain an unrepresentative jury6. These are just some of the many problems within the Hong Kong jury system. The system should be reformed by reducing the numbers of those that are disqualified, ineligible or exempt. A similar list to that of the UK would allow a greater cross section of the public to be called for jury service and would make the jury more representative. A change to the Jury Ordnance should also be recommended so that a jury cannot be confined by gender. In order for the Hong Kong jury to be representative there needs to be a major overall of the Jury Ordnance as there are far too many ways in which a person might be disqualified from serving. If the Hong Kong judicial system adopted a system similar to the UK then the balance of the jury would be fairer and the accused would be more likely to be tried by a jury of their peers. References Legislative Council of Hong Kong, Report of the Select Committee on the Problems Involved in the Prosecution and Trial of Complex Commercial Crimes. (1986) Vol. 1 & 2, cited in Findlay et al, Juries, p. 57. Mr Derry Wong, Associate Professor, Department of Professional Legal Education, Faculty of Law, City University of Hong Kong, Meeting with the Victorian Law Reform Committee (hereafter, `VLRC), 14 Jul. 1995, p. 3. Wesley-Smith, P., Constitutional and Administrative Law in Hong Kong, China and Hong Kong Law Studies, Jury Ordnance (cap) 3 http://www.legislation.gov.hk/eng/home.htm http://www.judiciary.gov.hk/en/crt_services/pphlt/html/jury.htm#4 http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/lawreform/jury/jury4/chap3.html#fn34 Read More