I'm not biased: Hong Kong judge Kevin Zervos refuses to step down from landmark human trafficking review
A High Court judge has refused to disqualify himself from hearing a landmark judicial review on Hong Kong's human trafficking laws after an unprecedented government bid to remove him due to his "positive stance" in addressing "exploitation".
Mr Justice Kevin Zervos handed down his decision yesterday, one month after the Department of Justice asked him to step down because of "apparent bias".
The review, set to begin in January, centres around a claim by a Pakistani man that the city's laws do not sufficiently protect victims of human trafficking, in breach of Hong Kong's Bill of Rights, which says no one shall be held in slavery or servitude.
Government prosecutors argued that a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude Zervos may be biased because of his actions as the director of public prosecutions (DPP) between 2011 and 2013.
In his decision, Zervos disagreed with the Department of Justice - acting on behalf of the secretary for justice, the director of immigration, the commissioner of police and the commissioner for labour - who asked for the recusal due to "the positive stance [Zervos] took in combating" human trafficking when he was top prosecutor.
"The fair-minded and informed observer is not without common sense and would view my actions and statements in the past as being general in nature, in relation to my duties as the DPP, in addressing the problem of human trafficking," he wrote.
During this time, Zervos supported initiatives to combat human trafficking, such as amendments to the prosecution code and a database to track cases of sex trafficking, enforced labour and abuse of domestic helpers.
Zervos said his actions as DPP were "consistent with the claimed objectives" of the government and part of the job.
"Most judicial officers are deeply involved in the law and … commit themselves to its reform and development and without such contribution the law and our legal system would suffer."
Zervos added the review was "to address essentially a question of law" regarding the Bill of Rights and he had not made comments about this issue before.
Lawyer Patricia Ho of Daly and Associates, which is representing the Pakistani man, said the recusal request was "deeply disconcerting" and signalled a deeper malaise.
"The message sent by such a step is the government is going to great lengths to defend themselves against accusations that they are not adequately protecting victims of human trafficking," she said last night. "For the government to again be seen to query … the independence and integrity of a judge is a further attack on the rule of law."
A Department of Justice spokeswoman said it "will study the court's decision before deciding on the way forward".
