Ng Lau Shing v. The Queen
Read the full judgment text of CACC 429/1980 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 30 May 1980.
1. Although this was an appeal limited to sentence for an offence of theft, I have decided to quash the conviction and order that the case be remitted for trial because I am not satisfied that justice has been seen to be done.
|
CACC000429/1980 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HONG KONG (Appellate Jurisdiction) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 429 OF 1980 -----------------
----------------- Coram: Rhind, J. in Court Date of Judgment: 30 May 1980 ----------------- JUDGMENT ----------------- 1. Although this was an appeal limited to sentence for an offence of theft, I have decided to quash the conviction and order that the case be remitted for trial because I am not satisfied that justice has been seen to be done. 2. There is no indication that the court below made any endeavour to ascertain which dialect was spoken by the appellant who was unrepresented. The only reference to language in the record is that the facts were read and explained to the appellant in Punti dialect, and that he agreed to those facts. 3. Presumably the plea was also taken in Punti. What the appellant said in answer to the charge I have no means of knowing. The record has merely the cryptic entry "Plea : admits theft", rather than the appellant's ipsissima verba. 4. Before me, it quickly became apparent that the appellant is far from comfortable in Punti. He is an elderly Chiu Chau who, despite twenty years residence in Hong Kong, has failed to master the local dialect. 5. When permitted to express himself in Chiu Chau the appellant quickly came up with an explanation which, if it might reasonably be true, would be a complete answer to the charge of theft. 6. It is elementary justice that an accused person must be afforded adequate facilities for effective communication with the tribunal trying him. 7. There is a very real possibility that in the present proceedings a plea of guilty could have been entered against the appellant because of a misunderstanding. 8. The only safe course is to remit the case for trial before a different magistrate. 9. To forestall the possibility of this type of misunderstanding in Hong Kong's multi-lingual society, it is sound practice for any judicial officer to ascertain the preferred dialect of any person appearing in his court, and to ensure this is noted in the record.
Representation: Appellant in person Miss Beeson, Crown Counsel, for respondent |