Speaking to media to mark four years of the current-term government, Lam said a recent process to plug loopholes in the SAR’s national security laws was conducted efficiently. The refinement enables the Chief Executive to certify a criminal offence as one involving national security. Lam said the process wasn’t rushed.
“Overall I would say it was fast, but more accurately we dealt with it efficiently,” he said.
“The key is not the number of days it took us, but whether the process was completed according to the law.”
Asked if there was room to speed up prosecution of national security offences, the minister said all cases were being handled in the most efficient manner permitted by the legal framework.
As for those who were arrested but not charged for their involvement in the 2019 protests, Lam said the Department of Justice (DoJ) had already fulfilled its role.
“Insofar that the police has sought DoJ’s advice on whether there is sufficient evidence to prosecute, we have provided our advice quite a long time ago,” he said.
“I can say with a high degree of confidence, if there’s sufficient evidence, our advice is that if there’s sufficient evidence to commence a prosecution, prosecution would have been commenced and probably completed by today.”
Anyone who has not been charged are not subject to legal restrictions, Lam stressed, meaning they are free to “study, work, or leave as any other ordinary citizen of Hong Kong”.
Looking ahead, Lam highlighted a few areas his department plans to focus on, including an ongoing review of the mediation regulatory system.
A working group under the DoJ made seven recommendations last week to enhance the city’s mediation regime, with an amendment bill set to be tabled to the Legislative Council in the second half of the year.
The DoJ also plans to review and modernise laws that facilitate the development of artificial intelligence, and is now leading an inter-departmental working group to coordinate related work.
“The purpose is to assist all government bureaus to review legislations or matters under their purview. In particular, to consider whether the existing legislation are adequate or sufficient to address issues arising out of the use of AI… and to identify whether there’s any lacuna in the law.”
Lam said he believes it was worth looking into whether the law can be amended to better define copyright matters for AI-generated content.
He added a balance must be struck to avoid stifling AI development.
