LettersWhy Hong Kong needs special courts for drug offenders
Readers discuss Hong Kong’s approach to drug-related cases vis-a-vis New York’s, and dog owners’ duty to the community
As Hong Kong grapples with drug addiction, it must prioritise rehabilitation over deterrence.
Hong Kong has long boasted a deterrent approach. According to Section 8 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, mere possession or use of a dangerous drug can mean up to seven years in jail. Unlike New York, which legalised personal cannabis use in 2021, cannabis remains illegal in Hong Kong. Indeed, Hong Kong remains one of the few common-law jurisdictions which use a strict mathematical approach in sentencing drug trafficking offences.
I handle numerous drug cases as a criminal defence lawyer in New York. I represent clients at several of the 141 “drug courts” within the state, including specialist “opioid courts” which have been dubbed “problem-solving” courts. Eligible defendants – for example, those with no history of violent convictions – are offered the opportunity to undergo court-based screening for a treatment programme. Interviews are conducted by court-appointed medical professionals. They proffer clinical recommendations, such as whether screened defendants should receive in- or outpatient treatment. Interested defendants need not confirm their participation until they have attended an orientation session.
The treatment programme features an extended period of supervision. This assuages public safety concerns. Defendants may be required to submit regular urine samples, attend group or individual therapy sessions and work with medical specialists on their health issues. They are dissimilar to Hong Kong’s addiction treatment centres, which are significantly curtailed by logistical constraints. Defendants can also maintain their professional commitments simultaneously, thus easing their reintegration into society.
Nevertheless, they must attend court periodically for their progress to be appraised. Specialist judges recognise the risk of relapse. Instead of chastisement, they offer practical solutions for ameliorating compliance. Court formalities are often eschewed in favour of direct interactions between judges and defendants, creating a collaborative atmosphere. In exchange for programme completion, the sentence gets drastically reduced. This improves employment outcomes.