HKSAR v. Tam Tsz Kwan

CACC000278/2001

CACC 278/2001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 278 OF 2001

(ON APPEAL FROM DCCC 166 OF 2001)

______________

______________

Coram: Hon Mayo VP in Court

Date of Hearing: 2 January 2002

Date of Judgment: 2 January 2002

_____________

J U D G M E N T

_____________

1.I am concerned that it may be the case that the exhibits officer could have been called as a witness in relation to the admissibility of the statements. This was a critical aspect of the defence case. Even if the voir dire had concluded an application could have been made to reopen it. I consider that leave should be given to the applicant to appeal.

2.A transcript should be obtained of the statement given by the applicant's counsel when he outlined the objections which were being made to the admissibility of the statements. In particular it needs to be ascertained whether there was any reference to an unidentified police officer having made threats.

3.Prosecuting counsel is also requested to make inquiries into the matter to ascertain whether any request was ever made for any officer to give evidence in relation to voir dire over and above the officers who did give evidence. A letter should also be sent to the instructing solicitor for the applicant for clarification of the matter. We will send that letter ourselves to obtain clarification on that.

4.Leave is granted and all these matters can be ventilated on the appeal.

Representation:

Mr Hui Siu-ting, Martin, SGC, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent

Applicant in person