LegCo Paper No. CB(2) 174/96-97(01)

Evidence (Amendment) Bill 1996
Issues and concerns to be discussed

I. Obtaining of evidence for overseas jurisdiction

  1. The need for the enactment of the Evidence (Amendment) Bill 1996 in view of the fact that the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (MLA) Bill is in the pipeline. The Administration has advised that the MLA Bill will be introduced into LegCo in early 1997.
  2. Implications of the Bill on the legal rights and protection of Hong Kong citizens. Under the Bill, a person might be compelled to give evidence even though under the law of Hong Kong he could not be compelled to do so. The proposed section 77DE(1) provides safeguard to any person from being compelled to give evidence by virtue of an order under section 77DD on the ground that to do so might tend to incriminate him
  3. whether the Administration’s responses to the following points raised by Members on 27 June 1996 are acceptable (p. 4 of Appendix to LegCo Paper No. CB(2) 40/96-97) :
    1. the meaning of "testimony otherwise than an oath"
    2. proposed amendment of ‘at any place’ by ‘at any place within Hong Kong’
    3. adding a related general avoidance of doubt provision in section 77DB

II. Corroboration rules in respect of sexual offences

Regarding the proposed abolition of corroboration rules, the Bar Association considers that there should be a provision making it mandatory for the Judge to give a warning to the jury of the danger of convicting on the complainant’s evidence alone. The Bar has proposed to add a provision alone the lines of the recommendation of the Law Reform Commission of Australia that where a party so requested, the Judge must warn the jury that the evidence may be unreliable, unless there are good reasons not to do so.

Last Updated on 10 December 1998