Hong Kong's DPP defends unqualified court prosecutors
Court prosecutors in Hong Kong need not be replaced by legally qualified lawyers, according to the city's top prosecutor, Kevin Zervos. In response to calls for the 115 'lay prosecutors' to be replaced by trained solicitors or barristers, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) said such a move would be a "mistake", and that these individuals were the "unsung heroes" of his division.
August 20, 2013 at 10:15 PM
4 minute read
Court prosecutors in Hong Kong need not be replaced by legally qualified lawyers, according to the city's top prosecutor, Kevin Zervos.
In response to calls for the 115 'lay prosecutors' to be replaced by trained solicitors or barristers, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) said such a move would be a "mistake", and that these individuals were the "unsung heroes" of his division.
"There has been a call for their replacement by legally qualified lawyers but I think this would be a mistake," Zervos wrote in the annual review of Hong Kong's prosecution work; the 'Prosecutions Hong Kong 2012′ report, released this week.
"Most of them have been doing it for many years. They are extremely knowledgeable and dedicated to their work. To my mind they are an important and essential part of our criminal justice system.
"They do a lot, and have to put up with a lot. We are greatly indebted to the work they do and they are the unsung heroes of the Prosecutions Division."
He was referring to those individuals who present around 180,000 cases of low level crime every year at Hong Kong's seven Magistrates' Courts on behalf of the government, most of whom have law degrees or tertiary qualifications but are not qualified lawyers.
Hong Kong's prosecutions division is the largest in the Department of Justice (DoJ), with approximately 125 public prosecutors or qualified lawyers and about 115 lay or court prosecutors.
Low level crime was previously presented to the court by law enforcement officers such as police or public health inspectors, but responsibility was handed over to the legal department in the 1970s.
Given the high number of cases, the DoJ permits non-qualified lawyers to handle minor cases such as littering or petty theft.
Zervos acknowledged however, that the work of the Magistrates Court was getting more demanding and complicated, and that the issue did need to be addressed.
"It is worth considering placing a level of government counsel within each Magistrates' Court to work together with court prosecutors," he added.
"[This would] enhance the efficiency and professionalism of prosecutions."
Other legal professionals agree with Zervos that is not necessary to change the criteria for becoming a court prosecutor.
Anthony Neoh, a senior member of the Hong Kong Bar, said difficult cases in the Magistrates' Courts were easily passed on to more qualified lawyers as and when necessary.
"I would agree with Zervos, I have seen some of these guys in action and they're pretty good.
"Some cases have become complex but they can always brief out those cases to barristers and solicitors. You wouldn't want or need a qualified lawyer to handle a simple case of jaywalking for example.
"It is easy to draw the line – you have the prosecutions department with qualified lawyers screening the cases."
Another concern raised by the DPP in the report was the lack of resources within the judiciary.
In his executive summary, Zervos said Court of Appeal judges were struggling to manage a large workload, which was having a negative impact on the outcome of cases.
Currently there are just 12 judges in total; with half handling criminal cases and the other half handling civil cases.
"[There are regretful] occasions when appellate judges, due to an inordinate workload, do not have time to read the papers or the case authorities when oral argument is presented by the parties," he wrote.
"The workload has also caused an inordinate delay in the delivery of decisions. This is not conducive to effective justice and needs to be addressed."
Neoh agreed, citing the need for more judges to handle increasing numbers of cases.
"The caseload of the Court of Appeal is very high," he said. "The judiciary ought to be given more money by the legislature to appoint more judges.
"The system does not afford enough resources to the judiciary. Without a doubt there should be more judges bearing in mind the caseload now and in the foreseeable future."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLatAm Moves: DLA Piper Chile, Brazil’s Demarest Build Out Disputes Muscle
Kingsley Napley and Lord Pannick Spearhead Private Schools' Challenge to Government VAT Policy
Spain Loses Appeal as London Court Rejects Claim of Immunity in €101 Million Arbitral Award Enforcement
Jones Day Expands European Footprint with Global Disputes Partner in Madrid
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250