Domestic helper seeks judicial review in case of masturbating boss
Director of Public Prosecutions' decision not to pursue prosecution of boss is considered immune under Basic Law
A domestic helper is trying to use a judicial review to test whether the Director of Public Prosecutions’ immunity against any challenge to his prosecution decisions – as granted by the Basic Law – can be overturned, a court has heard.
The woman, who is named as D in court for legal reasons, is seeking permission for the courts to review the director’s decision not to pursue prosecution of her male boss for allegedly masturbating in her presence last year.
Her lawyer, Gerard McCoy SC, argued the director could not cite Article 63 of the city’s mini-constitution as a reason to avoid the review.
The article says the Department of Justice “shall control criminal prosecutions, free from any interference”.
“The court must keep the DPP accountable and as equal as us,” McCoy told the High Court yesterday.
But barrister Peter Duncan SC, for the government, said whether the DPP decided to charge a person was not a subject of judicial review “unless the director acts outside the scope of the constitution power other than Article 63”.
