A person in custody was dissatisfied with the restriction of calling non-family members, claiming that the “Code of Work” has exceeded his authority and violated the freedom of communication guaranteed by the Basic Law, and filed for judicial review.
After hearing the submissions, the judge of the High Court issued a verdict today (26th) and reiterated that the prisoners do not enjoy complete freedom of communication. They ruled that the applicant lost the lawsuit and believed that the relevant "Code of Work" was reasonable and not unconstitutional.
The applicant Cai Xinxin, and the respondent was the head of the Correctional Services Department and Stanley Prison.
Cai Yaochang, the secretary of the Hong Kong Association of Community Organizations who assisted Cai, said that he was disappointed by the ruling and that the community organization association would consult with legal opinions and contact Cai before deciding whether to appeal.
Cai Yaochang, secretary of the Hong Kong Association of Community Organizations, said that his organization has assisted the applicant Cai Xin to submit the review. He said that he would consult legal opinions and notify the applicant before deciding whether to appeal.
(New photo by Zhu Di)
When applying for a review, Tsai stated that the relevant "Code of Work" violated the freedom of communication and the right to privacy protected by the Basic Law and the Hong Kong Human Rights Law.
He also mentioned the use of telephones by foreign prisoners.
Foreign circumstances are not helpful in handling this case
In his ruling, the judge pointed out that the correctional system in different regions is different, and he believes that the situation in foreign countries is not helpful in handling the case.
The judge also emphasized that Cai said that the relevant "Code of Work" completely prohibited prisoners from using telephones, which was incorrect.
If the prisoner has a real need, he can call for compassionate reasons, so the relevant "Code of Work" is considered reasonable.
Prisoners do not enjoy complete freedom of communication
In addition, Cai pointed out that the Prisons Ordinance did not impose restrictions on prisoners' use of telecommunications, and believed that the provisions of the Code of Work were ultra vires.
However, the judge pointed out that the Prisons Ordinance did not restrict prisoners from using e-mail or other electronic devices to communicate with the outside world.
If Tsai’s statement is correct, the prisoner can use e-mail or other electronic devices to communicate outside the prison, but the judge believes that this statement is clearly incorrect.
The judge emphasized that prisoners do not enjoy complete freedom of communication, and the claim that the "Code of Work" is ultra vires also does not hold up, so he ruled that Cai lost the lawsuit and had to pay the defendant's costs.
Case Number: HCAL 188/2016
Dissatisfied with the failure to call Tsai Yiu Cheong for a review of the prisoner’s right to communication Winner: Should but late sentence, the prisoner was released and accused of the Correctional Services Department’s holiday record disappeared and submitted to judicial review
01News
