Read the full judgment text of on BabelCite. was delivered on 7 January 2008 before Ma CJHC, Stock JA, Suffiad J.
Criminal law – mandatory life sentence for murder – punitive or retributive term – judicial review of Long-Term Prison Sentences Review Board decision – whether absence of judicial determination of punitive term renders regime unconstitutional under Basic Law art. 28 and Hong Kong Bill of Rights arts. 3, 5, 10 – held, no, following Lau Cheong & Another v HKSAR, (2002) 5 HKCFAR 415 – whether Board's reasons in 2004 review inadequate for failure to indicate punitive term – held, criticism of 2004 reasons but academic because subsequent 2006 review conducted – whether oral hearing automatically required – held, no; right under s.12(5) of Long-term Prison Sentences Review Ordinance, Cap. 524 is discretionary and applicant waived it – whether Board can entertain challenge to conviction based on retrospectivity of 1993 Crimes (Amendment) Ordinance majority-verdict provisions – held, no; Board's function is predicated on valid conviction and valid sentence; such challenges lie with the courts – R v Lai Hon Man [1994] 2 HKC 210 applied – appeal dismissed – no order as to costs save that applicant's costs to be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Regulations – costs order nisi in those terms.
Legal issues: Constitutionality of mandatory life sentence regime without punitive term determination · Adequacy of the Board's reasons in the 2004 review · Right to an oral hearing before the Board · Power of the Board to consider alleged invalidity of conviction based on retrospective majority-verdict legislation
Outcome: Appeal dismissed. The Board was bound by Lau Cheong; the 2004 reasons complaint was academic; no oral hearing was required; and the Board could not entertain the retrospective-conviction argument.