Results of study of matters raised in the Annual Report 2017 to the Chief Executive by the Commissioner on Interception of Communications and Surveillance
Training for relevant officers of law enforcement agencies
Mr CHAN Chun-ying noted the Commissioner’s remark in the Annual Report regarding some LEA officers being not conversant with the operating procedures of the systems concerned or the requirements on handling of ICSO cases. He also noted the Commissioner’s suggestion for LEAs to provide their officers with sufficient training. He asked whether training on the requirements under ICSO was incorporated into the general training programmes of respective LEAs or only provided to relevant officers of LEAs.
S for S responded that various training was provided by LEAs to officers in performing duties under ICSO. Induction training was provided for officers newly appointed to perform such duties. Practice sessions were organized to familiarize relevant LEA officers with the operation of relevant systems and the definitions of LPP as well as JM. Refresher training, seminars, case-sharing sessions and workshops were organized for relevant LEA officers. Training was also provided on the requirement to notify the panel judge of any subsequent material change in circumstances which involved LPP and compliance with the additional conditions imposed by the panel judge. Where necessary, relevant LEA officers were also briefed on the Commissioner’s comments which required particular attention. The LEAs also invited the Commissioner to a forum in January 2019 to speak to frontline officers on the requirements under ICSO.
Cases involving legal professional privilege
Noting that there was an increase in the number of cases involving LPP information in 2017, Mr CHAN Chun-ying asked whether the LPP information concerned had been obtained from interception of communications involving the offices of lawyers.
S for S responded that the Commissioner had pointed out at his briefing held in the morning of 4 December 2018 that none of the seven cases of obtaining LPP information in 2017 involved direct communication between the object of interception and their lawyers.
Proposed amendments to the First Schedule to the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance
Mr CHAN Chun-ying asked whether there was any noticeable trend of abuse of the five dangerous drugs in Hong Kong. He asked whether the five substances were subject to any form of regulation before the proposed subsidiary legislation came into operation.
C for N responded that the Administration had been closely monitoring the drug trend in Hong Kong. The statistics from the Central Registry of Drug Abuse, and the experiences of LEAs as well as non-governmental organizations providing drug treatment and rehabilitation services did not suggest a prevalent domestic abuse of the five substances. While the five substances had not yet been regulated under DDO, the import and export of the substances were subject to regulation under the Import and Export Ordinance (Cap. 60).
Mr CHAN Chun-ying noted that it would take about a year between the time of the relevant decision of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs (“UNCND”) of placing a substance under international control and the time the five substances were brought under control in the First Schedule to DDO. He asked whether such a timeframe was in line with the timeframe of other Member States of UNCND. C for N responded that under the established procedures for bringing a substance under statutory control, the Administration would consult the relevant sectors, the Action Committee Against Narcotics and the Panel before the relevant subsidiary legislation would be considered by the Chief Executive in Council and tabled at LegCo for negative vetting. Compared with previous exercises, the current exercise would be shortened by about three months. There was a large number of Members States in the context of UNCND, and their progress of bringing the substances concerned under local control varied from one to another