Call for registration: Giving a voice to the unheard victims of environmental crime (22 May 2024)

Illegal wildlife trade is the fourth most lucrative black market for transnational crime. Smuggling of endangered species is a low risk, high-profit crime, made all the more attractive to criminals in the absence of deterrent sentencing and effective enforcement.

To help legal professionals counter wildlife crime, Professor Amanda Whitfort of the Law Faculty has developed an international tool to help judges and prosecutors better understand the harms caused by illegal wildlife trade.  Bringing together law and science, her Species Victim Impact Statements initiative sets out the impacts of wildife crime for over 150 species, providing a voice for animals, plants and ecosystems in the criminal justice system. The SVIS initiative has been endorsed as an effective tool to combat wildlife crime by the United National Office on Drugs and Crime and has been included in the Nigerian Rapid Reference Guide for Prosecutors published in 2023. Professor Whitfort will talk about her approach to educating law enforcement officers in a seminar with the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organised Crime this Wednesday 22 May at 4pm. Registration is free and please click here for registration online.

Giving a voice to the unheard victims of environmental crime

A Talk By Amanda Whitfort , Prof Ray Jansen , Alastair MacBeath , Diana Chilambwe , Edward Banda (ACAZ, LLB, Cert) And Ashleigh Dore

22 May 2024

4:00 PM - 5:30 PM HKT

About This Talk

Animals and other species are often voiceless victims of environmental crimes. Such crimes were often marginalized in the legal sphere, treated as minor infractions with little regard for the impact on species and ecosystems. However, a new legal approach is reshaping how these offences are prosecuted and perceived. Species victim impact statements articulate the harm caused by environmental crimes from an animal rights perspective, the detrimental effects on species populations, the broader ecological damage as well as the associated impact on human populations.

This in an innovative approach that introduces eco-centric concerns into anthropocentric legal systems. It has grown into an effective body of practice, leading to increased sentences for environmental crimes in countries where academics and civil society organizations promoting this tactic are operating. The GI-TOC recently published a guide on the experience of those who have successfully developed and used species victim impact statements in Hong Kong, South Africa and Zambia.

This event brings together these experts to discuss why species victim impact statements are necessary, the particular challenges for their respective jurisdictions while offering guidance to assist those looking to develop these statements for use in court.

Darcy Lynn Davison-Roberts on RTHK Agender Café (a Media KE event) to discuss the Report by TALK on child sex abuse in Hong Kong (KE)

Introduction: Darcy Lynn Davison-Roberts was involved in the research and publication of the report by TALK on child sex abuse in Hong Kong. Consequently, Taura (the founder of TALK) and Darcy Lynn Davison-Roberts were on RTHK Agender Café (podcast) in November 2022 to discuss the report.  To view the RTHK session on Facebook, click here.

New Report Sheds Light on Child Sexual Abuse in Hong Kong: 
Understanding the Magnitude and Impact of the Problem

Child sexual abuse is a serious and pervasive problem that affects children of all ages, races, and socioeconomic backgrounds. Unfortunately, despite its prevalence, child sexual abuse is often underreported and misunderstood. In an effort to better understand the magnitude of this issue in Hong Kong, a new report has been released that brings together recent data and trends from surveys and official departments and bureaus records.

     The report, entitled "Child Sexual Abuse in Hong Kong: What We Do and Do Not Know," was produced by TALK Hong Kong, a volunteer peer-led group of women/femme survivors of sexual abuse and assault founded in Hong Kong in 2019. TALK provides support group meetings and undertakes advocacy work on related issues, believing that to tackle child sexual abuse we must understand its causes, scope, scale, and impact. The organization's purpose is to collate the evidence on child sexual abuse in Hong Kong into a single report that can inform the development of prevention efforts.

      This report was produced without any funding and with the pro bono support of, amongst others, Darcy Lynn Davison-Roberts, Senior Lecturer at The University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law & TALK Hong Kong Advisory Network.

      The report highlights the lack of comprehensive and accurate data on child sexual abuse in Hong Kong, which is a barrier to understanding the true extent of the problem and developing effective prevention strategies. However, the report's authors hope that by bringing together the available data and trends, they can make a meaningful contribution to the conversation around child sexual abuse in Hong Kong. They also intend to make this an annual report, to be updated on regular basis and in this way, provide a clearer picture of the situation.

      This inaugural report serves as an important resource for anyone working to understand and address child sexual abuse in Hong Kong. It provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on the issue and highlights areas where further research is needed. By working together and sharing information, we can hope to make progress in preventing child sexual abuse and providing support to those who have been affected by it.

     Taura Edgar, the founder of TALK Hong Kong and Darcy Davison-Roberts, appeared on RTHK’s Agender Café, where they shared results of the report and the work they've been doing to help bring the issue of child sexual abuse out of the darkness, by providing valuable insights and perspectives on the problem of child sexual abuse in Hong Kong, and discussed the various ways in which individuals and organizations can take action to prevent abuse and support survivors. 
To view the report, click  here. 

To view the RTHK interview, click here. 

Darcy Lynn Davison-Roberts: "A HANDBOOK FOR PRACTITIONERS | HONG KONG" (chapter in Civil Liability for Human Rights Violations: A Handbook for Practitioners, KE)

"A HANDBOOK FOR PRACTITIONERS | HONG KONG"
by Darcy Lynn Davison-Roberts, Senior Lecturer,
Faculty of Law, The University of Hong Kong
in 
Civil Liability for Human Rights Violations:
A Handbook for Practitioners
pp.1-38 (online version of the Hong Kong Chapter)

The Bonavero Institute of Human Rights at the University of Oxford, led a project on civil liability for human rights violations from 2019 to 2022. Funded by the Oak Foundation, the project involved a comparative study of the legal systems of a wide range of jurisdictions to analyze existing domestic law mechanisms or principles for imposing civil liability on public bodies, corporations, and individuals in three specified categories of human rights violations: (1) assault or unlawful arrest and detention of persons, (2) environmental harm, and (3) harmful or unfair labor conditions.

One of the project’s outcomes is a Handbook for Practitioners. The handbook is intended to serve as a practical resource for understanding when and how civil claims can be used as a tool to vindicate human rights in 19 jurisdictions. The country report for Hong Kong SAR was authored by Darcy Davison-Roberts, Senior Lecturer at the University of Hong Kong's Faculty of Law.

Designed for practitioners, the handbook allows readers to refer directly to a specific jurisdiction, with each report following a uniform template. The Editor's Introduction explains the handbook's scope and provides comparative insights drawn from the reports.

The handbook can be downloaded as one complete PDF file or as individual country reports and the Editor's Introduction as separate PDF files. This resource serves as a comprehensive guide for legal professionals and human rights advocates looking to understand and utilize civil liability mechanisms for human rights violations in different countries.

Abstract of the Hong Kong Chapter: Hong Kong is a special administrative region that exists as part of the People’s Republic of China under the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ principle. Until 2047, the legal system of Hong Kong is one of common law inherited from the British colonial government. The judge-decided case law is augmented through ordinances enacted by the Legislative Council. The Basic Law and the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance are the primary statutory sources of fundamental human rights in Hong Kong, but they apply to and bind only public bodies. Civil claims against private actors are commenced based on the common law of torts and statutory remedies.

Introduction of the Hong Kong Chapter:  

1. The legal system of Hong Kong is one of common law, inherited from the British colonial government that governed Hong Kong as a crown colony from 1842 to 1997. Upon the resumption of sovereignty of Hong Kong by the People’s Republic of China in 1997, and under the principle of 'One Country, Two Systems' (1C2S), Hong Kong was designated as a ‘special administrative region’ of the People’s Republic of China and was to enjoy a ‘high degree of autonomy’. Fundamental to the 1C2S principle was the promise that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) was to retain its governmental, political and economic systems for 50 years, ending in 2047. This means that the systems implemented by the British colonial government, including the common law legal system, the rule of law, an independent judiciary, and a tradition of protecting human rights, are to remain untouched during this period. Furthermore, all laws in force in Hong Kong at the time of the Handover are to remain in force in the post-Handover period, being the common law, rules of equity, ordinances, subordinate legislation and customary law, with limited exceptions.

2. While the HKSAR is a common law jurisdiction, the common law, comprised primarily of judge-decided case law, is augmented by way of ordinances (legislative instruments) that are enacted by the HKSAR Legislative Council (LegCo). The Special Administrative Region’s ordinances and subordinate legislation can be accessed through a bilingual, free and searchable database. Additional sources of law in the HKSAR include national law of the People’s Republic, the Basic Law (which is the HKSAR’s constituting document) and interpretations of the Basic Law by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China (NPCSC), customary law and international law.

3. The HKSAR has an independent judiciary ...

Marcelo Thompson: CERRE Report on Digital Sovereignty and the Normativity of Data Governance with Recommendations (KE)

Photo credit: CERRE’s LinkedIn page

Knowledge Exchange:
Digital Sovereignty and the Normativity of Data Governance (CERRE Report)

The “Global Governance for the Digital Ecosystems” Report was released at the Paris Peace Forum on November 11, 2022, and presented by the project’s co-leads — the Forum’s President, Pascal Lamy (former Director General of the WTO and Board Member at CERRE), and Bruno Liebhaberg (CERRE’s Director General) — to Emmanuel Macron, the President of France.

Dr Marcelo Thompson co-authored the Report’s recommendations on
Data Governance and authored the paper on Digital Sovereignty —
titled: “Digital Sovereignty and the Normativity of Data Governance”.

In the paper, Marcelo identifies the various ways in which extra-legal (political, moral, cultural) considerations pervade data governance debates and challenge the prospects of harmonisation initiatives. The report points nevertheless to the inevitable and often legitimate role played by such considerations and makes concrete recommendations for navigating these.

Introduction: Harmonisation approaches to data governance suggested in earlier papers of this workstream resonate with recent proposals in the scholarly literature advocating for a global data privacy agreement - either as an agreement anchored in the WTO system, or as an expression of a new Digital Bretton Woods agreement.  These proposals respond to difficulties in reconciling differences between global data privacy regimes, as well as between the more substantive regimes among them, and the principles that inform the international trade system.  They speak of ideals of universality that the networks of technology and trade are taken to reflect, given the equalising potential of such networks, as enablers of "development of human capital" and "democratisation of opportunity throughout the world".  As Plato gestured in "The School of Athens", these proposals point up. 

The whole report can be accessed at: https://cerre.eu/wpcontent/uploads/2022/11/GGDE_FulIReport.pdf

Ryan Whalen on the What, Why and How of Automated Patent Decision-making (ALTI Forum)

The Amsterdam Law & Technology Institute’s team is inviting external faculty members to publish guest articles in the ALTI Forum. Here is the latest contribution authored by Ryan Whalen (The University of Hong Kong).

"The What, Why and How of Automated Patent Decision-making"

Ryan Whalen

9 May 2022

Introduction

The patent system is slow, expensive, and inaccurate. So much so that some refer to it as “broken.”1 Meanwhile, patent applications are increasing in number and complexity.2 Examiners are overworked, which leads them to make more incorrect decisions.3 This has led some to advocate for increased use of technologies, and in particular patentability classifiers, at patent offices.4

     This essay provides an overview of issues related to implementing automated patentability decision-making technologies within patent offices. It first briefly discusses the technologies in question, underpinned by advances in machine learning and natural language processing. The subsequent section explores why the patent system is a prime candidate for the adoption of increased automation. Finally, it turns to exploring different ways these technologies could contribute to existing patent examination processes, or enable the development of new categories of “machine examined” patent grants with distinct legal protections... Click here to view the full text. 

HKU Law Collaborates with INTERPOL on the Use of Digital Evidence in Prosecutions in Asia (Report and Training)

The Use of Digital Evidence in Prosecutions in Asia

INTERPOL

February 2022
Executive Summary

Digital evidence has become an essential element of criminal investigations and prosecutions for all types of crimes. This research report by The University of Hong Kong, commissioned by the International Criminal Police Organisation, is a study of the laws governing the use of digital evidence in criminal cases in nine beneficiary countries in Asia, namely the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, the Kingdom of Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, the Kingdom of Cambodia, the Republic of Maldives, Mongolia, the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal, the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The report also studies the existing legal arrangements that enable these countries to request and obtain digital evidence from abroad in cross-border cases.

      All nine countries are members of the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering, five are members of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), four are members of The Commonwealth, and three are members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Six of the countries have mixed common law legal systems, while the other three have civil law systems. The evidence laws of four of the mixed common law jurisdictions are based on or influenced by the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.

     This study has found that the laws and practices in all nine countries generally favour the admissibility and use of digital evidence in criminal cases. No instance was found of a court rejecting digital evidence merely on the grounds that the evidence was in a digital form... Click here to download the full summary.  Professor Simon Young led the HKU research team responsible for preparing the research report.  In May 2022, Professor Young and his team helped to organise the training of prosecutors and police across nine Asian countries in INTERPOL's e-Evidence Programme for Prosecution (Module 2: Legal framework on e-Evidence admissbility).

New Report on Exotic Pet Trade in Hong Kong: Wild, Threatened, Farmed: Hong Kong's Invisible Pets

A report released this week by local NGO ADM Capital Foundation, co-authored by Assoc Prof Amanda Whitfort focuses on the exotic pet trade in Hong Kong. The report highlights the lack of transparency in the trade, the need for updated regulations to better control smuggling of live endangered species for rare animal collectors, the unsuitability of many exotic species to be kept as pets and the negative effects on conservation and animal welfare when exotic pets are intentionally or accidentally released into local ecosystems.

     “Hong Kong's lack of a positive list of acceptable exotic pets and failure to look behind imports of large numbers of animals from suspicious source countries, which should set off alarms for law enforcement agencies, encourages the importation of smuggled animals for the pet trade and is sending species that are at serious risk of extinction more quickly towards that fate” said Whitfort. “Our current policies and laws undermine the objectives of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity” she added. 

     Whitfort called on government to

• improve oversight of wild animal trading licences, removing opportunities for laundering of smuggled animals
• impose possession licence requirements on all private owners of endangered species
• introduce a positive list of acceptable pets that can be imported into and possessed in Hong Kong
• prohibit mercy release of animals and the businesses that support the practice within the Territory
• improve regulation of the pet ttrade to protect animal and public health.

The press report had input from the SPCA (Hong Kong), the Kadoorie Farm and Botanical Garden, WWF (HK), local academics working on wild animal trade and private vets working with exotic pets.

           Amanda Whitfort and ADM Capital Foundation Team and Dr Woodhouse from the SPCA (HK)

Amanda Whitfort Meets Malaysian Prosecutors and Judges to Explain Species Victim Impact Statement (SVIS) Initiative

On 11 March 2022, Ms Amanda Whitfort gave a 1 hour presentation on the Species Victim Impact Statement (SVIS) initiative and how to sentence wildlife crime effectively to Malaysian prosecutors and judges in a training workshop organised by Panthera (USA NGO) and Justice for Wildlife Malaysia (NGO). For more information on the SVIS Initiative, you can access the website at https://www.svis.law.hku.hk. 

Nijman & Shepherd (2015)

Select List of Covid Restriction Offences in Hong Kong (Updated: 24 February 2022)

This blog post aims to help persons in Hong Kong navigate the various Covid-19 restrictions and offences imposed under the law.  Click here for the lists of premises in Hong Kong specified for compulsory testing (Centre for Health Protection). As from 24 February 2022, the Chief Secretary for Administration has a power to grant an exemption in writing from any requirement under any enactment for purposes of preventing, protecting against, delaying or otherwise controlling the incidence or transmission of COVID-19 or treating patients with COVID-19.  Last Updated: 24 February 2022.

A. Complying with Vaccine Pass Direction (Cap 599L) (expiry date)

• A person must not (a) enter or remain on any specified premises unless the person has been vaccinated in the specified manner for the purposes of a vaccine pass direction in relation to the premises; or (b) board or remain on any specified public transport carrier unless the person has been vaccinated in the specified manner for the purposes of a vaccine pass direction in relation to the carrier.  Secretrary's direction.  Maximum punishment: $10,000 fine.  Does not apply to these persons.  Specified medical exemption certificate.  
• The person in charge of any specified premises or specified public transport carrier must comply with any requirement made in a vaccine pass direction in relation to the premises or carrier.  Secretary's direction. Maximum punishment: $50,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment. Defence available. 
• A responsible person for a vulnerable person must use the responsible person's best endeavours to ensure that the vulnerable person complies with section 5(1) (prohibition on entering or remaining on specified premises unless vaccinated, etc).  Maximum punishment: $10,000 fine. Defences available.  

B. Prohibition on Group Gatherings (Cap 599G) (expiry date)

• Group gatherings of more than 2 persons at a public place are prohibited during a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022).  Offences to participate in gathering, organise the gathering, and to knowingly allow the taking place of the gathering as one who owns, controls or operates the place/premises at which the gathering takes place.  Maximum punishment: $25,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment. Defences available. List of exemptions. Chief Secretary's permission.

C. Prohibition on Multi-Household Gatherings (Cap 599G) (expiry date)

• Multi-household gatherings (i.e. a gathering of persons ordinarily living in more than 2 households) at any private premises are prohibited during a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022).  Offences to participate in gathering, organise the gathering, and to knowingly allow the taking place of the gathering as one who owns, controls or operates the premises at which the gathering takes place.  Those solely providing care and support to any other participant of the gathering ordinarily living in another household who has particular needs are not counted when counting households.  Maximum punishment: $25,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment. Defences available. Exemptions available. Chief Secretary's permission.

D. Requirements and Directions in Relation to Catering Businesses (Cap 599F)  (expiry date)

• Person responsible for carrying on a catering business contravening requirement to cease selling food or drink or close premises as directed by the Secretary for Food and Health for a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022).  Secretary's direction.  Does not apply to certain premises.  Maximum punishment: $50,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment.  Defences available. 
• Person responsible for carrying on a catering business contravening requirement to comply with direction issued by the Secretary for Food and Health for a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022).  Secretary's direction.  Maximum punishment: $50,000 fine and 6 months' imprisonment. Defences available. 
• Person who enters, or is present on, any catering business premises contravening requirement to comply with direction issued by the Secretary for Food and Health for a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022). Secretary's direction. Maximum punishment: $10,000 fine. Defences available. 

E. Directions in Relation to Scheduled Premises and Specified Events (Cap 599F)  (expiry date)

• Manager of any scheduled premises (other than event premises), or the organizer of a specified event held on event premises, contravening requirement to comply with a direction issued by the Secretary for Food and Health for a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022).  Secretary's direction. Maximum punishment: $50,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment.  List of scheduled premises.  Defences available. 
• Person who enters, or is present on, any scheduled premises contravening requirement to comply with direction issued by the Secretary for Food and Health for a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022). Secretary's direction.  List of scheduled premises.  Maximum punishment: $10,000 fine.  Defences available. 

F. Wearing of Mask (Cap 599I) (expiry date)

• On public transport carrier/MTR paid area. Person contravening requirement to wear a mask at all times, during a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022), when the person is (a) boarding or on board a public transport carrier; or (b) entering or present in an MTR paid area.  Exceptions and defences.  Maximum punishment: $10,000 fine. 
• In a specified public place. Person contravening requirement to wear a mask at all times, during a specified period (24 February to 9 March 2022), when the person is entering or present in a specified public place.  Exceptions and defences.  Maximum punishment: $10,000 fine.

G. Compulsory Testing for Certain Persons (Cap 599J) (expiry date)

• A person who fails to comply with a requirement under a compulsory testing direction commits an offence.  Maximum punishment: $10,000 fine. Power of specified medical practitioner to issue written direction requiring a person to undergo a specified test.  Defences available.
• A specified person who fails to comply with a requirement under a compulsory testing notice commits an offence.  Maximum punishment: $10,000 fine. Latest testing notices.  Power of Secretary to issue testing notices.  Defences available.
• A person who fails to comply with a requirement under a compulsory testing order commits an offence.  Maximum punishment: $25,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment.  Power of prescribed officer to order testing for non-compliance with testing direction or notice. Defences available.

H. Premises Subject to Restriction-Testing Declaration (Cap 599J) (expiry date)

• A restricted person leaving any restricted premises commits an offence.  Maximum punishment: $25,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment. Power of Secretary to make restriction-testing declaration.  Prohibition does not apply in certain circumstances.
• A person, other than a prescribed officer or person specified under section 19M(3), entering any restricted premises commits an offence. Maximum punishment: $25,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment.  Power of Secretary to make restriction-testing declaration.  Prohibition does not apply in certain circumstances.

I. Restrictions During Quarantine (Cap 559C) (expiry date)

• A person must not leave the place of quarantine in which the person is placed under quarantine without permission given by an authorized officer. A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes this prohibition commits an offence. Maximum punishment: $25,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment. Compulsory quarantine of certain persons arriving at Hong Kong. 
• A person must not, without permission given by an authorized officer, knowingly enter an assigned place of quarantine in which another person is placed under quarantine unless (a) the person is an authorized officer or a health officer; or (b) the person is to be placed under quarantine in the place.  A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes this prohibition commits an offence. Maximum punishment: $25,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment. Compulsory quarantine of certain persons arriving at Hong Kong.  Written permission of an authorized officer.
• A person against whom a quarantine order is made must not contravene the terms of quarantine specified in the order. A person who, without reasonable excuse, contravenes this prohibition commits an offence. Maximum punishment: $25,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment. 

Research Report on Accreditation and Regulation of Hong Kong Interpreters/Translators in Ethnic Minority Languages (HKU study commissioned by EOC)

"A Study on a Potential Model for Accreditation and Regulation of Interpreters and Translators in Ethnic Minority Languages in Hong Kong"

Principal Investigator: Dr Eva Ng

Co-Investigators: Dr Janny Leung & Ms Kelley Loper 

Published in December 2021

Executive Summary (excerpt): The Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) commissioned a research team from The University of Hong Kong (HKU) to conduct a project titled “A Study on a Potential Model for Accreditation and Regulation of Interpreters and Translators in Ethnic Minority Languages in Hong Kong”. This project primarily aims to explore the possibility of establishing an accreditation and regulation system for interpreters and translators (I/Ts) working in ethnic minority (EM) languages and how such a system should be implemented. The current research project commenced in December 2018 with the following specific objectives: 

(a) To provide a statistical profile of practising I/Ts in EM languages for public services, including, but not limited to, community support services, medical services and legal services; 

(b) To review overseas experiences in establishing an accreditation and regulation system, with particular focuses on major obstacles encountered and solutions adopted; 

(c) To identify options for a standardised accreditation mechanism for I/Ts in EM languages with reference to the current practice, overseas experiences and major stakeholders’ views; 

(d) To examine potential regulation models, including, but not limited to, voluntary registration and licensing, with reference to the current practice, overseas experience and major stakeholders’ views; 

(e) To provide options for a regulatory body with its functions, powers and accountability delineated; 

(f) To explore prospective pathways to introduce an accreditation and regulation system; and potential training needs for interpreters and translators to meet the requirements. 

The research team reviewed representative overseas accreditation and regulation models. It also conducted online surveys and focus group interviews with stakeholders, including EM language I/Ts in Hong Kong, users and operators of translation and interpreting (T&I) services in EM languages, to collect their views on the establishment of an accreditation and regulation system.   Click here to read the full report.

"Want a Divorce? In China, Try, Try Again" (Frank He's Interview on Sixth Tone)

Want a Divorce? In China, Try, Try Again
by 
Cai Yineng
Published at Sixth Tone
26 November 2021

In 2004, while conducting fieldwork at a local court in southern China, legal scholar He Xin struck up a casual conversation with a judge. On the subject of challenges he faced in the job, the judge grumbled about his law school education, which he characterized as focused more on teaching how the law was written in books, rather than the “law in action.” “Why did no professor mention that, in divorce cases for instance, Chinese courts had made a habit of rejecting almost all first attempts to file?” the judge asked. “It’s not until they file again that the petition will be processed.”
     The conversation started He on a decade-long journey through the weeds of Chinese divorce law. The product of these efforts, Divorce in China: Institutional Constraints and Gendered Outcomes, was published by New York University Press this year. In the book, He draws on a wide range of empirical evidence from court audits and judge interviews to demonstrate how the enforcement of China’s Marriage Law — the first law passed after the Communist Party of China founded the People’s Republic in 1949 — has diverged from its original intention of protecting women’s rights to marry and divorce. Responsible for handling cases efficiently and maintaining social stability, judges often choose to broker a deal that can be accepted by both parties, rather than issue a ruling that holds one or the other responsible. In practice, this has led to drawn-out legal proceedings, the trivialization of serious problems like domestic violence, and an inability or unwillingness to protect women’s custody rights. ...Click here to read the full article.

Richard Wu Awarded the HKU Law Faculty Knowledge Exchange Award 2021

The Faculty Knowledge Exchange (KE) Awards of The University of Hong Kong were introduced in 2011 to recognise each Faculty’s outstanding KE accomplishment that has made demonstrable economic, social or cultural impacts to benefit the community, business/industry, or partner organisations. Dr Richard Wu of the Department of Professional Legal Education received the Faculty Knowledge Exchange Award 2021 of the Faculty of Law for the project “From Research into Values of Future Lawyers to Promoting Legal Professionalism in Greater China Region: Informing and Implementing Legal Ethics Education in Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan”.

     Dr Wu’s vision of promoting legal professionalism was key to the development of new legal ethics courses in three major universities in the Greater China Region: School of Transnational Law, Peking University in Mainland China, HKU Faculty of Law in Hong Kong, and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University School of Law in Taiwan. As an Adjunct Professor in both Mainland China and Taiwan as well as Associate Professor in Hong Kong, he retains close ties with law schools in Greater China Region. Dr Wu’s research on the values of law students in the region has promoted awareness of the importance of legal professionalism and helped develop legal ethics education across the Greater China Region and his courses have been extremely well received by the law students who have taken them. The courses are designed on a value-based experiential learning model that includes innovative use of technology, sharing on legal ethics issues by global lawyers and global law professors, innovative reflective learning and pioneering visual teaching aids. ...Click here to read the full post.

HKU Law Awarded Five KE Impact Projects 2021/2022

The University of Hong Kong's Knowledge Exchange (KE) Funding Scheme for Impact Projects supports projects that have the potential to create social, economic, environmental or cultural impacts for industry, business or the community by building on expertise or knowledge in the University and projects designed to collect evidence for corroboration and evaluation of impacts. Engagement projects that aim to benefit non-academic communities beyond Hong Kong are strongly encouraged.

     Five projects are supported under the KE Impact Project Grant Scheme in the 2021/22 with an exceptional outstanding case being awarded with the maximum funding amount of HK$150,000. Congratulations to :

• Ms Amanda Whitfort "Wildlife Crime: Knowledge Transfer for Informed Sentencing in Greater China". This ongoing interdisciplinary project involves a collaboration between Associate Professor Amanda Whitfort, Faculty of Law, Dr Caroline Dingle, School of Biological Sciences and Dr Gary Ades, Head of Fauna, Kadoorie Farm and Botanical Garden, in producing species victim impact statements, showing the impact of wildlife crime on endangered species. These statements aid the Agricultural Fisheries and Conservation Department, Customs and Excise Department and the Department of Justice (Hong Kong) and Forestry police and prosecutors in the PRC to effectively prosecute wildlife crimes, and assist the judiciary in Hong Kong to deter, through effective sentencing, wildlife offences against Hong Kong legislation.

• Ms Isabella Wenting Liu and Ms Stephanie Biedermann “Understanding Rule of Law for Secondary School Students”. The project aims at enhancing Hong Kong secondary school students’ understanding of the rule of law and its crucial role as the foundation of Hong Kong’s success and institutions. HKU law students will develop teaching plans on different rule of law topics and deliver legal talks at secondary schools. This project provides a platform for HKU students and secondary schools to form connections and develop a forum for discussion on foundational legal concepts. Teaching materials will be made accessible to the wider community through the ROLE website (www.role.hku.hk).

• Ms Darcy Lynn Davison-Roberts “Employment & Labour Claims Knowledge Hub”. In partnership with LITE Lab@HKU, A2J and HKWWA, this project seeks to implement the Hub; a technology-based caselaw databank for use by the primary beneficiary HKWWA. The Hub will provide the means by which HKWWA can collect, collate and analyse labour and employment caselaw and in turn facilitate their mission of promoting and improving women workers’ interests and status in Hong Kong through their advocacy work. Once established, the project intends to make the Hub open-sourced and available to other NGOs. This project aims to achieve greater transparency in the judicial decision-making process and to increase access to justice for grassroots, female workers in respect of their labour and employment law issues in Hong Kong.

• Ms Darcy Lynn Davison-Roberts “Legal Advice Programme for Grassroots Women Workers”. This project aims to address the lack of employment and labour law expertise and legal resources available to the grassroots women workers served by the primary beneficiary, the Hong Kong Women Workers’ Association (“HKWWA”). By conducting a needs and capacity assessment, the project will first seek to understand what HKWWA, and its clients identify as their existing and future legal needs and what legal knowledge and resources exist within HKWWA. Following this preliminary analysis, the project will revise and expand upon HKWWA’s existing legal case handling practices and knowledge base and design and implement a bespoke monthly community legal advice programme similar to those utilised by other Hong Kong NGOs.

• Dr Richard Wai Seng Wu “Building Better Lawyers in China and Australia in the Post-Covid-19 Era Through Strengthening Their Capabilities in Innovation, Creativity and Ethics with Experiential Learning”. This interdisciplinary project aims to build better lawyers in China and Australia by strengthening their capabilities in innovation, creativity and ethics in the post-Covid-19 era. Cutting-edge knowledge in these areas will be delivered through webinars to lawyers in these two countries by academics from HKU, UC Berkeley, Melbourne University and Birmingham University, as well as law firm partners, legal counsel and legal technologist who have local experience in China and Australia. This project seeks to create social impact by raising Chinese and Australian lawyers’ awareness of the importance of innovation, creativity and ethics for globalized legal practice in post-Covid-19 era.

New HKU SPCA Study on Animal Cruelty in Hong Kong (Amanda Whitfort)

On Friday 3 September, the Law Faculty's Associate Professor Amanda Whitfort and Dr Fiona Woodhouse Deputy Director (Welfare) of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Hong Kong) published an empirical study of animal cruelty cases in Hong Kong. The study was funded by the Policy Innovation and Co-ordination Office of the HKSAR government. It examined 335 cruelty cases in the SPCA's police investigation database from 2013 to 2019 and identified patterns of offending, including which types of animals are most at risk and in what circumstances.

Dogs were the primary victims in all categories of animal abuse. In 75% of prosecutions for active maltreatment or neglect-related cruelty the offender was male. In most cases the offender was the dog's owner or a family member of its owner. The majority of neglect cases involved mongrel dogs being abandoned inside private premises without food/water. In nearly all cases of abandonment, the animals were found alone inside rented village houses (with their owners not living on site) and, in nearly one third of cases, the animals died. In many cases the dogs found were significant in number and had been collected from strays by persons who did not have sufficient financial resources or time to care for them adequately. The study found action is necessary to educate owners to voluntarily surrender animals they can no longer care for appropriately rather than place their welfare at high risk by abandoning them. Government policies prohibiting the keeping of dogs in public housing, alongside historical dog population management strategies, have both contributed to the serious problem of abandonment of dogs in Hong Kong.

In two significant animal hoarding cases, where the dogs had started to eat each other to survive, more than 100 animals had been collected by the offenders and placed in so-called 'rescue' shelters. The shelters were accepting animals from members of the public in exchange for donations. To counter the risk to animals in unregulated shelters, there is an urgent need to introduce shelter licensing legislation. A further reason to regulate animal rescue shelters is the lack of financial transparency as to how public donations are being used.

Other findings of the study include the need for:

• a duty of care for animals to be introduced to compliment current anti-cruelty legislation;
• regulations to control grooming parlours, animal trainers and boarding facilities;
• new offences to deter animal poisoners;
• improved regulations to control the use of traps;
• a new offence to combat animals falling from heights; and
• prohibitions on mercy release of wild animals.

A full report of the study can be read on the Faculty staff webpage for Associate Professor Whitfort at https://www.law.hku.hk/academic_staff/amanda-whitfort/

New KE Initiative: HKU "Species Victim Impact Statement (SVIS) Initiative" (Amanda Whitfort)

HKU "Species Victim Impact Statement (SVIS) Initiative" : giving wildlife a voice in courts

What are Species Victim Impact Statements?
Species Impact Victim Statements (SVIS) explain to lawyers and judges the harm that wildlife crime has done to individual animals, species and ecosystems.​
      A human victim of crime can make a victim impact statement alerting the court to the harm suffered as a result of the crime.
      Non-human victims of wildlife crime have no similar voice in court. In the absence of training in ecology and conservation science, it is difficult for prosecutors and judges to assess the impact of wildlife crime.
Where harms are underestimated, defendants receive inadequate sentences that do not effectively deter wildlife offending.
     Species Victim Impact Statements help to ensure informed sentences for wildlife crimes.
 

To know more about SVIS Initiative, click: https://www.svis.law.hku.hk/

CCL's Equality Rights Project and Chinese NGOs Submit Report to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women

The Equality Rights Project (under the Centre for Chinese Law) and two other Chinese NGOs jointly submitted a parallel report to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women ahead of the adoption of the list of issues for the ninth periodic report of China at its 80th Pre-Session (which will be held in this March). The report covers only Mainland China. It refer to the Ninth Periodic Report of the State Party (SP) and the CEDAW Committee’s Concluding Observation (CO). The List of Issues are ordered according to the articles in CEDAW, together with the two issues that are addressed in Concluding Observation of 2014. The report was published in February 2021. To view the report, click here.

In the News: Director of HKU's Centre for Chinese Law, Dr Angela Zhang, Comments on Recent China Anti-trust Law Developments

Dr Angela Zhang, Associate Professor and Director of the Centre for Chinese Law, has been sharing her knowledge on Chinese anti-trust law and her views on the US-China relations.  A collection of her recent articles, interviews, and comments reported in the international media is found below:

· China is Leaning into Antitrust Regulation to Stay Competitive with the U.S., Fortune, 9 February 2021

· Why Is China Cracking Down on Alibaba?, Project Syndicate, 2 February 2021

· The Dangerous Legal War Posing a New Threat to China-US Relations, Nikkei Asia, 1 February 2021

· China's Alibaba Probe Is Not All Bad News , Nikkei Asia, 8 January 2021

· In China, Behave or Face a Campaign, Bloomberg, 7 January 2021

· Should China Wield Antitrust Laws to Counter US Attacks on Huawei Amid Global Tech Competition? South China Morning Post, May 26, 2020

· ByteDance’s Douyin Sues Tencent, Claiming Antitrust Violations, krASIA, 3 February, 2021

· China Antitrust: ByteDance and Tencent Legal Battle Seen as Potential Landmark Case, South China Morning Post, 3 February, 2021

· ByteDance Files Lawsuit Against Tencent in Tit-for-tat Battle, Financial Times, 3 February, 2021

· China’s Big Tech Clampdown: Why Some Businesses Stand to Benefit, Aljazeera, 26 January, 2021

· China is Joining the Global Push to Rein in Tech Giants, The Wall Street Journal, 24 January, 2021

· Why China’s Central Bank Leads Antitrust Drive and How this May Affect Alipay, WeChat Pay, South China Morning Post, 22 January  2021

· China’s Approval of Cisco-Acacia Deal Conditional on Fair Competition but also an Olive Branch to Joe Biden, South China Morning Post, 22 January, 2021

· China’s Startups Hope Tech Crackdown Creates New Opportunities, Bloomberg, 21 January , 2021

· Crackdown on Jack Ma’s Empire Gathers Pace Despite Reappearance, Financial Times, 21 January, 2021

· Do Fintech Giants Alipay and WeChat Pay have Monopoly Power? China’s New Regulation Leaves Experts Guessing, South China Morning Post, 21 January, 2021

· China’s Central Bank Proposes Antitrust Rules for Country’s Booming Online Payments Sector, Pandaily, 21 January, 2021

· China's Crackdown on Alibaba Goes Beyond Teaching Jack Ma a Lesson, S&P Global Market Intelligence, 19 January , 2021

· Trump’s Final Days Bring New Turmoil to U.S.-China Relations​, Bloomberg, 12 January, 2021

· China Brings in New Law to Fight Trump's Sanctions, BBC, 11 January, 2021

· China Launches Measures to Protect Companies from US Sanctions, Financial Times, 10 January, 2021

· Jack Ma's Absence Raises More Questions than it Answers Amid Ant and Alibaba Probe, The Straits Times, 9 January, 2021

· "Alibaba Antitrust Probe Presents New Challenges for China’s Regulators 12 Years after Implementation of Anti-monopoly Law", South China Morning Post, 7 January, 2021

· "Jack Ma was Almost Bigger than China. That's What Got Him into Trouble", CNN Business, 6 January, 2021

· "China’s Mighty State Monopolies Cast a Big Shadow over Private Enterprise, but will Antitrust Law and Vows of Reform Level the Playing Field?", South China Morning Post, 5 January , 2021

· "Mo money, Ma problems - Chinese Trustbusters’ Pursuit of Alibaba is only the Start", The Economist, 2 Jan 2021

· "Alibaba: a Chinese Success Story comes under Scrutiny", TRT World, 25 December, 2020

· "全球掀起反壟斷風潮　何時輪到香港？", 香港01, 21 December, 2020

· "Don't Expect an 'Explosion of Cases' from China's Antitrust Push: Professor", cnbc.com, 23 November , 2020

WHO Policy Brief on Emergency Use Designation of COVID-19 Candidate Vaccines: Ethical Considerations for COVID-19 Placebo-controlled Vaccine Trials and Trial Unblinding

"Emergency Use Designation of COVID-19 candidate vaccines: Ethical considerations for current and future COVID-19 placebo-controlled vaccine trials and trial unblinding"

Policy brief by the World Health Organization (WHO), 18 December 2020

Associate Professor Calvin Ho is a member of the WHO ethics expert group which produced the policy brief. He also shared on the ethical and regulatory issues in the vaccine race in a webinar on "International Law, Science and Technology in the Time of COVID-19" hosted by the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law of the University of Cambridge on 4 December 2020. Click here for the recording.  

Introduction: The grave public health threat posed by COVID-19 has spurred the development of dozens of COVID-19 candidate vaccines, and the conduct of numerous accelerated COVID-19 vaccine trials, many of which are in Phase 2/3 of testing. Given this severe threat, some drug regulatory authorities including the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Union’s European Medicines Agency (EMA) have indicated that, if interim data are sufficiently compelling, they are prepared to issue COVID-19 candidate vaccines conditional / emergency / early approval prior to completion of Phase 3 trials. In such instances the regulatory authority signals that the balance of risk and benefit to designated target populations justifies deployment of the vaccine pending the registration / licensure of that product on public health grounds. Similarly, to assist World Health Organization (WHO) Member States and UN procurement agencies in decision-making on the acceptability for use of specific products in the context of a public health emergency, WHO has established an Emergency Use Listing (EUL) procedure to expedite the availability of interventions needed in public health emergency (PHE) situations. The validity of a WHO EUL in the context of a public health emergency is generally 12 months. All decisions to grant an EUL are reassessed at 12 months (or sooner, if further data become available that could alter the original opinion). EUL is contingent upon the vaccine developer completing the development of the product and its trial, and submitting the candidate vaccine for registration/licensure and WHO prequalification.  EUL is not equivalent or an alternative to WHO prequalification, and should not be thought of as such. For the purposes of this policy brief, all mechanisms that facilitate the public accessibility of investigational vaccines prior to the conclusion of their respective clinical trials or their licensure, shall hereinafter collectively be referred to as ‘Emergency Use Designation’ or EUD... Click here to download the policy brief.

Response to IOSCO Consultation on Use of AI and Machine Learning by Market Intermediaries and Asset Managers (FTAHK & LITE Lab@HKU)

In October 2020, the FinTech Association of Hong Kong and LITE Lab@HKU submitted a joint written response to the International Organization of Securities Commission (IOSCO)'s public consultation on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) by market intermediaries and asset managers. The response strongly agrees with IOSCO that the use of AI and ML by market intermediaries and asset management firms creates novel opportunities and risks, with an overall need to foster trust in AI and financial markets. The risks should be appropriately mitigated by proportionate regulation that fosters responsible innovation and promotes market integrity, fairness and investor protection, financial stability, competition and innovation. It should also support financial inclusion and combat financial crime. The response draws attention to four important themes: (1) Encouraging the use of AI/ML in RegTech; (2) Addressing unintended consequences that may discourage innovation; (3) Guidance on Proportionality Factors (especially for Customer and Client Disclosure); and (4) Human-In-The-Loop approach to address AI fairness, accountability and transparency.  The joint response can be accessed here.

Giuliano Castellano et al on Coordinating Prudential Regulation and Secured Transactions Frameworks : A Primer (World Bank Group)

Coordinating Prudential Regulation and Secured Transactions Frameworks : A Primer

Giuliano G Castellano, Pratibha Chhabra, and John M Wilson

The World Bank Group

Published in November 2020

Description: Coordination between secured transactions law and rules regulating financial products and institutions is of primary importance to support establishing a sound and inclusive credit ecosystem. This Primer illustrates why coordination between secured transactions law reforms and prudential regulation is needed; introduces the rationale and key tenets of prudential regulatory regimes. Also, specific attention is given to capital requirements and prudential loan-loss provisioning. The Primer also identifies a set of typical issues emerging from the reform experiences of several jurisdictions and presents the key elements of the regulatory strategy to approach such issues.