Lawmaker says sex predators deserve no anonymity, but Chris Tang argues unfavorable to rehabilitation
The scumbags who sexually assault children do not deserve anonymity, therefore the public should have the right to know the identity of sex offenders, lawmaker Nixie Lam Lam said in the Legislative Council meeting on Wednesday.
But her view has sparked a heated debate between her and Secretary for Security Chris Tang Ping-keung, as Tang opposed her proposal, saying that it would seriously invade others’ privacy and is unfavorable to sexual offenders’ rehabilitation.
Currently, employers can require job seekers to provide their sexual conviction record for jobs related to taking care of children and mentally incapacitated persons, but this is not a coercive measure.
In the Legco meeting yesterday, Tang said the scope of the sexual conviction record check scheme has been gradually expanding in recent years since the system was rolled out in December 2011.
The government agrees that the scope of the scheme should be expanded to further strengthen the protection of children and mentally incapacitated persons, Tang said.
In considering the expansion of scope, we have to be prudent and ensure that there is sufficient capacity given the limited capability of the electronic system and constraints in the police’s manpower and resources, he added.
Tang also told lawmakers that the government is not considering changing the scheme from voluntary to mandatory, and it will keep in view its operation from time to time and review the need for legislation in the future.
Lam said in response that one case of sexual abuse should already be considered too much, and it is also no room for compromisation while it comes to cases related to children.
She said foreign countries have a register that contains information of sexual offenders and their photo, therefore called on the government to provide a blacklist of sexual offenders for local parents to take as reference.
In some countries, nearby residents will even be notified when sexual offenders move into the neighborhood. Scumbags who sexually assault children do not have the right to remain anonymous, Lam said.
However, Tang said making public their criminal record is not beneficial to offenders rehabilitation.
For example, if a 10-year-old student sexually assaulted one of his or her classmates, should their record be made public for the rest of their life? Should we deprive them of their rights to rehabilitate? Tang said.
He therefore said Lam’s proposal is not in line with Hong Kong’s values, and it is undesirable to make public sexual offenders’ records.
The issue of whether or not sex offenders should be granted anonymity has ignited a fierce debate in Hong Kong. Lawmaker Nixie Lam Lam has argued that sexual predators who assault children should not be allowed to remain anonymous, as the public has a right to know their identities. In a Legislative Council meeting, Lam made a passionate plea for transparency, calling the offenders scumbags and urging the government to provide a blacklist of sexual offenders for parents to use as a reference.
However, Secretary for Security Chris Tang Ping-keung disagreed with Lam’s proposal, stating that it would violate others’ privacy and hinder the rehabilitation of sexual offenders. Tang emphasized that the scope of the current sexual conviction record check scheme has been expanding to better protect children and mentally incapacitated individuals. While he acknowledged the need for caution due to limited resources and manpower, Tang assured lawmakers that the government would monitor the system and review the need for future legislation.
Lam responded by emphasizing that even one case of sexual abuse is one too many, particularly when children are involved. She highlighted the registers and notifications that exist in other countries, which inform nearby residents when sexual offenders move into the neighborhood. Lam argued that those who sexually assault children should not be allowed to maintain their anonymity.
Tang, however, maintained that making the criminal records of offenders public would be counterproductive to their rehabilitation. He posed the question of whether it would be fair to publicly disclose the records of a 10-year-old student who sexually assaulted a classmate, and debated whether it would be justifiable to deprive them of their right to rehabilitate for the rest of their lives.
The discussion revolves around striking a balance between protecting the public and respecting individual rights. While Lam believes that the public’s right to know is paramount, Tang argues for the importance of allowing offenders the opportunity to reform. As the debate continues, the future of sex offender anonymity in Hong Kong remains uncertain.
