The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government recently proposed amendments to the prison rules to strengthen the management of persons in custody. These revisions include regulating visitation rights, abolishing the arrangements for remand prisoners to wear personal clothing (“private attire”) and consume outside food (“private meals”), and enhancing the enforcement powers of correctional officers.

The proposed amendments are based on national security considerations and the practical needs of prison management, particularly in response to over 300 disciplinary incidents related to “private meals” from 2018-24. By reinforcing security, order, and discipline while complying with international standards, these changes are justified and deserve public support.

First, the Correctional Services Department (CSD) has statutory duties and powers to manage prisons in an efficient and effective way. Under Hong Kong’s existing Prisons Ordinance (Cap 234) and Prison Rules (Cap 234A), the CSD’s statutory duties include maintaining prison order, ensuring the safety of persons in custody, and preventing criminal activities. The amendments grant the Commissioner of Correctional Services broader regulatory authority, which remains within the legal framework and does not exceed statutory limits. The commissioner’s power to regulate visits based on their purpose stems from practical management needs rather than arbitrary discretion.

Second, the proposed amendments are justified on national security and public order considerations. Following the implementation of the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law, prison management must adopt appropriate measures to prevent acts endangering national security. The amendments will empower the commissioner to restrict certain visits to prevent abuse, such as the transmission of prohibited information or incitement of unrest. This aligns with Article 6 of the NSL, which requires the HKSAR government to strengthen measures against acts threatening national security.

The rationale for abolishing “private clothing” and “private meals” is to strengthen prison security and discipline. It is contended that the current system allows remand prisoners to wear personal clothing and consume outside food. However, this has led to over 300 disciplinary incidents from 2018-24, including concealed contraband, food safety issues, and unequal treatment. Standardizing prison uniforms and meal arrangements will reduce management loopholes and ensure a fair and secure prison environment.

To enhance the enforcement powers of correctional officers, the amendments propose imposing fines and imprisonment for resisting or obstructing correctional officers — a measure consistent with the legislative intent of Section 18 of the Prisons Ordinance. This will deter misconduct, uphold the authority of correctional staff, and reduce violent incidents.

In summary, the proposed amendments to prison rules address practical management needs while complying with Hong Kong law, the NSL, and international standards. They strike a balance between prison security, order, discipline, and human rights

Dissent has been floated against the proposed amendments but it is mostly misguided. For example, some people claim that the amendments will violate the rehabilitation principle and that the commissioner might adopt a “better safe than sorry” approach. However, rehabilitation does not equate to lax management; prisons must prioritize order and security. The amendments do not seek to strip prisoners of basic rights but to prevent visitation abuse. While remand suspects are presumed innocent, prison management must mitigate risks — especially in national security cases requiring stringent visit controls.

Some argue that the proposed amendments are overly broad and could affect prisoners’ choice of lawyers. However, the revisions do not ban legal visits; they merely empower the commissioner to regulate them when necessary. Lawyers complying with rules will face no unreasonable visit restrictions. NSL-aligned visit controls already exist, so the amendments will not “de facto deprive prisoners of legal representation” as some people claim.

Still, some have raised the question of whether the proposed amendments are like “shooting mosquitoes with a cannon”, and have urged the authorities to disclose lawyer misconduct statistics. However, the 300-plus incidents related to “private meals” reveal systemic vulnerabilities. The proposed amendments aim to preempt risks, not just address isolated violations. CSD data also shows attempts by visitors to smuggle contraband into prisons, justifying stricter regulation.

Some others said they are worried that the commissioner’s expanded powers could restrict family visits. However, the amendments are not about “presuming guilt” but risk assessment. Visits without violations will not be restricted. Recording measures ensure lawful procedures — not deprivation of rights. Judicial review remains available if abuse occurs.

In summary, the proposed amendments to prison rules address practical management needs while complying with Hong Kong law, the NSL, and international standards. They strike a balance between prison security, order, discipline, and human rights. The community should assess the revisions rationally and support the government’s lawful efforts to enhance prison administration, safeguarding national security and social stability. The proposed amendments are constitutional, legal, reasonable, and deserve support.

The author is a law professor, director of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies, and president of the Association for the Promotion of Rule of Law, Education and Technologies.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.