Equal Opportunities Commission (Hong Kong)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Equal Opportunities Commission
平等機會委員會
Equal Opportunities Commission logo.svg
AbbreviationEOC
Formation20 May 1996; 25 years ago (1996-05-20)[1]
TypeStatutory body
Legal statusActive
Headquarters16/F, 41 Heung Yip Road, Wong Chuk Hang
Location
ServicesInvestigation
Advocacy
Advisory
FieldsHuman rights
Chairperson
Ricky Chu Man-kin
Cecilia Chan Lai-wan

Andy Chiu Man-chung
Susanne Choi Yuk-ping
Holden Chow Ho-ding
Mohan Datwani
Maisy Ho Chiu-ha
Maggie Koong May-kay
Elizabeth Law
Trisha Leahy
Joseph Lee Kok-long
Juan Leung Chung-yan
Shirley Marie Therese Loo
Henry Shie Wai-hung
Rizwan Ullah

Yu Chui-yee
Expenses (2018)HK$125,967,377[2]
WebsiteOfficial website
Equal Opportunities Commission
Traditional Chinese平等機會委員會

Established in 1996, the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) is Hong Kong’s statutory body responsible for the implementation of the anti-discrimination ordinances, namely the Sex Discrimination Ordinance, the Disability Discrimination Ordinance, the Family Status Discrimination Ordinance and the Race Discrimination Ordinance.

History[]

Background[]

In 1994, the median wage of women in Hong Kong were about a third lower than that of men, and classified advertisements often limited senior positions in the private sector to men and low-paying jobs sought for female applicants.[3]

The Hong Kong government has had a history of opposing anti-discrimination legislation.[4]: 337  When the United Kingdom ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in 1986, the effect of CEDAW was extended to other British dependent territories.[5]: 22  However, the Hong Kong government requested that CEDAW to not be extended to Hong Kong until it could assess its effect,[6]: 9  claiming that the ratification of CEDAW might lead to "significant economic and social consequences".[7] Specifically, the government believed that CEDAW and anti-discrimination laws would harm Hong Kong's laissez-faire market and traditional Chinese customs that treat men and women differently.[5]: 22–23 

In the 1990s, the Hong Kong government was increasingly pressured to address equality and human rights. During the 1991 legislative election, which produced Hong Kong's first directly elected lawmakers, women's groups pressured candidates into acknowledging discrimination against women in the city.[4]: 363  As a result, the 1991 Legislative Council asserted more pressure on the executive than its predecessors.[4]: 362  In November 1991, Legislative Councillor Emily Lau helped form an ad-hoc group in the legislature to study women's issues.[4]: 363  In March 1992, an inter-departmental working group on sex discrimination was established to advise the government on whether to extend CEDAW to Hong Kong.[7] On 16 December 1992, Lau introduced a bill that called on the Hong Kong government to support the application of CEDAW in the city.[4]: 363–364  The government opposed the bill, but it was nonetheless passed after all but the three ex-officio members voted in its favour.[4]: 365 

Emily Lau at a demonstration in 2014.

The Hong Kong government did not act on the bill immediately and maintained that the public must first be consulted.[6]: 9  After nine months of preparation, it issued the Green Paper on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men in August 1993.[4]: 366  Legal scholar Carole Petersen said the government had understated the discrimination against women in the green paper.[4]: 366–368  By the end of the public consultation on the green paper, Secretary for Home Affairs Michael Suen admitted that "[it] would be difficult for [the government] to come up with credible arguments not to extend CEDAW".[8]

Founding[]

Anna Wu, then an appointed Legislative Councillor, tabled the Equal Opportunities Bill 1994 before the legislature,[9]: 345  during a period leading up to the handover of Hong Kong which Wu believed to have given a window of opportunity for expanding equality rights.[1] The bill sought to outlaw discrimination on a number of grounds, including sex, marital status, pregnancy, sexuality, race, age, disability, and political and religious conviction.[4]: 372  If passed, it would also prohibit employers from placing advertisements that discriminate against job seekers by their sex and age.[10] As a private members' bill, which did not affect government revenue, the Equal Opportunities Bill was tabled without prior government consent.[1]

Wu also proposed the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission Bill, which would create a statutory body for equality and a tribunal to adjudicate claims under the Equal Opportunities Bill.[4]: 372  The Equal Opportunities Tribunal could cost 800 million Hong Kong dollars to set up.[10]

The proposed equality institutions were also opposed by China. Legal scholar Wu Jianfan of Peking University and Hong Kong pro-Beijing politician Raymond Wu said the bill would violate the Basic Law, which was to become Hong Kong's mini-constitution following the United Kingdom's transfer of the city's sovereignty to China in 1997.[11] Wu Jianfan said the tribunal was not mentioned in the Basic Law and could not exist in Hong Kong under Chinese rule.[11]

The Hong Kong government rejected the bills in June 1994 and instead tabled two other bills with a narrower scope that prohibited sex and disability discrimination respectively.[12] The bill on sex discrimination also sought to set up an equal opportunities commission instead of the independent human rights commission Anna Wu had proposed.[12] The decision drew criticism from Wu and equality groups, which said the Equal Opportunities Commission, unlike the human rights commission, had no legal power to prosecute people found to have violated anti-discrimination laws; it could only monitor complaints of discrimination and settle them.[3]

Despite government opposition, Wu's Equal Opportunities Bill proceeded through different stages at the Legislative Council. Public hearings on the bill were held in 1995. In April 1995, Wu decided to break the bill into three bills, each addressing different areas of discrimination, to ensure some portions of it could pass before the legislative session ends.[13]

On the other hand, the government on 27 May 1995 pushed to resume second reading of its Sex Discrimination Bill against the wishes of the bills committee and before amendments were finalised.[14] The Sex Discrimination Bill was passed at 1:25 am on 29 June 1995 after a nine-hour debate, during which the government and pro-business legislators quashed attempts by liberal lawmakers to expand the scope of the bill to include removing the Small House Policy exemption and shortening the grace period for small businesses.[15]

The EOC was established on 20 May 1996 with Fanny M. Cheung has its inaugural chairperson,[16] after candidates such as Elsie Leung had turned down the offer that included a salary of $157,250 and cash bonus $70,320 every month.[17]

Early history[]

In 1997, the EOC brought its first sex discrimination case to court against Apple Daily, which placed an advertisement for "pretty female reporters" to report on balls and social events.[18] The District Court ruled in favour of Apple Daily, with the judge deciding that the ambiguous language used on the advertisement, placed in the celebrity section of the newspaper, meant it did not violate the Sex Discrimination Ordinance.[18] The Court of Appeal then overturned the decision, saying that allowing the ambiguous language would permit employers to advertise freely for only one gender.[19] The court did not impose penalties, and the EOC said it was more important to clarify the law than to punish Apple Daily.[19]

Anna Wu replaced Fanny Cheung as the EOC's chairperson on 1 August 1999, who has been a member of the commission since its founding.[20]

Former appeals court judges Michael Wong then replaced Wu from 1 August 2003. Supporters of Wu said her contract was not renewed because she had criticised the government during her tenure as the EOC's chairperson.[21] Wong's period as EOC chairperson was short. Wong dismissed Patrick Yu before he took the post as the commission's operations director because Yu had said in the South China Morning Post that Hong Kong should enact a race discrimination law, which Wong saw as an inappropriate comment.[22] Prior to taking up his position at the EOC, Yu was the executive director of the Northern Ireland Council for Ethnic Minorities. On 6 November, Wong stepped down after being embroiled in a scandal involving the dismissal of EOC director of operations Patrick Yu, who was appointed by Anna Wu, and allegations that he had accepted free airline tickets as a Court of Appeals judge.[23] The Independent Commission Against Corruption initiated an investigation against Wong into the allegation of bribery, but Wong was not prosecuted due to insufficient evidence.[24]

List of chairpersons[]

Name Photo Tenure Notes
Fanny M. Cheung

張妙清

1996 - 1999 Founding chairperson.[25][26]
Anna Wu
胡紅玉 		Anna Wu Hung-yuk.JPG 1 August 1999 - 31 July 2003
Michael Wong Kin-chow
王見秋 		1 August 2003 - 6 November 2003
Patricia Chu Yeung Pak-yu
朱楊珀瑜 		15 December 2003 - 15 December 2004
Raymond Tang Yee-Bong
鄧爾邦 		12 January 2005 – 28 February 2010
Lam Woon-kwong
林煥光 		Lam Woon-kwong.JPG 1 February 2010 – 31 March 2013
Dr. York Chow Yat-Ngok
周一嶽 		York Chow Yat-ngok.jpg 1 April 2013 – 31 March 2016
Alfred Chen Cheung-ming
陳章明 		11 April 2016 – 10 April 2019
Ricky Chu Man-kin
朱敏健 		11 April 2019[27] – Present

Powers and Functions[]

The EOC's main function is to implement the four anti-discrimination ordinances in Hong Kong, namely the Sex Discrimination Ordinance, the Disability Discrimination Ordinance, the Family Status Discrimination Ordinance and the Race Discrimination Ordinance. It aims to eliminate discrimination, to promote equal opportunities and to receive complaints and investigate alleged cases of discrimination.[9]: 341  Where cases of potential discrimination is identified, the EOC is empowered to provide legal assistance (including representation in court) to plaintiffs.[28] It also conducts research and offers public educational programmes to promote equal opportunities.[9]: 341–342 

Advertisement of the EOC on a tram.

The EOC also has the power to review the effectiveness of the anti-discrimination ordinances and propose amendments.[9]: 342  The EOC's first Discrimination Law Review commenced in 2014 and had its final report published in 2016.[1]

Controversies[]

Michael Wong's travel claims[]

In 2003, Michael Wong Kin-chow was removed as the Chairman of the EOC after an investigation by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) revealed that Mr Wong had deliberately made improper applications to the HKSAR Government for reimbursement of several first-class flights between 1998 and 2001, valued at HK$171,666.[29] It was also reported that Mr Wong had continued to draw his pension as a former High Court judge while he was employed at the EOC. The ICAC's report was submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in November 2005 who ultimately decided not to lay charges.[30]

Alfred Chen's suitability[]

On 1 June 2016, a concern was raised by some legislators that the newly appointed chairperson, Alfred Chen, had expressed views which suggested he was not suitably aware of the key issues necessary to execute his duties as head of the EOC. These included a dismissal of the need to address the lack of any anti-discrimination ordinance to protect sexual minorities, confusion of concepts such as gender identity and sexual orientation, and declaring that the EOC should echo the views of the government.[31]

See also[]

References[]

  1. ^ a b c d Ngo, Jennifer (26 May 2016). "Twenty years on: Victories and setbacks for Hong Kong's Equal Opportunities Commission". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 16 April 2019.
  2. ^ Equal Opportunities Commission (2018). Transformation for a Better Future: 2017/18 Annual Report (PDF) (Report). Retrieved 16 April 2019.
  3. ^ a b do Rosario, Louise; Harnischfeger, Uta (7 July 1994). "Double Standards: Activists say colony has far to go on women's rights". Far Eastern Economic Review. Hong Kong. p. 27.
  4. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Petersen, Carole J. (1996). "Equality as a Human Right: The Development of Anti-Discrimination Law in Hong Kong" (PDF). Columbia Journal of Transnational Law. 34: 335–388.
  5. ^ a b Petersen, Carole J.; Samuels, Harriet (2002). "The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: A Comparison of Its Implementation and the Role of Non-Governmental Organisations in the United Kingdom and Hong Kong". Hastings International and Comparative Law Review. 26 (1): 1–50.
  6. ^ a b Petersen, Carole J. (1994). "The Green Paper on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men: An Exercise in Consultation or Evasion?" (PDF). Hong Kong Law Journal. 24 (1): 8–16.
  7. ^ a b Peter Lai, Secretary for Constitutional Affairs (24 June 1992). "Discrimination Against Women" (PDF). Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). Hong Kong: Legislative Council.
  8. ^ Yue, S. Y. (31 December 1993). "UN Convention to Be Adopted". South China Morning Post. p. 2.
  9. ^ a b c d Kapai, Puja (2009). "The Hong Kong Equal Opportunities Commission: Calling for a New Avatar" (PDF). Hong Kong Law Journal. 39 (2): 339–359.
  10. ^ a b So, Lai-fun (28 March 1994). "Stalling tactics hit rights bills". South China Morning Post.
  11. ^ a b Chan, Quinton (20 February 1994). "Human rights bill 'breaches Basic Law'". South China Morning Post. p. 2.
  12. ^ a b "Human rights verdict lashed". South China Morning Post. 2 June 1994. p. 6.
  13. ^ Wong, Lok (22 April 1995). "Equal rights bill split up to meet Legco timetable". South China Morning Post. p. 4.
  14. ^ Wong, Lok (27 May 1995). "Rushed bill meets protests". South China Morning Post. p. 4.
  15. ^ "Equality bill passed as changes founder". South China Morning Post. 29 June 1995. p. 7.
  16. ^ Moir, Jane (21 May 1996). "Equality chief pressed to take up trousers case". South China Morning Post.
  17. ^ Moir, Jane (9 February 1996). "$225,000 for equal rights job". South China Morning Post. p. 3.
  18. ^ a b Ho, Lydia (1 April 1998). "Judge dismisses sex discrimination case". Hongkong Standard. Hong Kong.
  19. ^ a b Parsons, Charlotte (28 November 1998). "Beautiful reporters ad broke bias law". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 1 April 2021.
  20. ^ So, Sanna (23 July 1999). "Harder equality probes vowed". Hongkong Standard.
  21. ^ Lord, Paris (3 July 2003). "Equality body chief 'silenced by Tung'". The Standard.
  22. ^ Shamdasani, Ravina (28 May 2004). "EOC finally settles up with sacked employee". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 1 April 2021.
  23. ^ "H.K. equal rights commission chief quits amid scandal". Kyodo News. 6 November 2003.
  24. ^ "Prosecution of High Court judge dropped" (Press release). Hong Kong Government. 25 January 2006. Retrieved 1 April 2021.
  25. ^ "THE PIONEERS – BLAZING THE TRAIL: Past Chairpersons of EOC". Equal Opportunities Commission. Retrieved 27 November 2019.
  26. ^ "Fanny M. Cheung: Award for Distinguished Contributions to the International Advancement of Psychology". American Psychologist. 67 (8): 719–721. 2012. doi:10.1037/a0030605. ISSN 1935-990X.
  27. ^ Ng, Kang-chung (12 April 2019). "New chief of Hong Kong's Equal Opportunities Commission warns against 'hastily made law' to protect sexual minority rights". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 16 April 2019.
  28. ^ "Guide to Discrimination Law in Hong Kong" (PDF). Mayer Brown JSM. p. 26.
  29. ^ The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. "Statement by the Director of Public Prosecutions on the case of Mr Michael Wong Kin-chow", Press Release, Hong Kong, 25 January 2006, Retrieved on 6 December 2017
  30. ^ Legislative Council Secretariat. "Background brief for the meeting on 23 October 2006: The case of Mr Michael WONG Kin-chow", Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services, Hong Kong, 20 October 2006, Retrieved on 6 December 2017
  31. ^ The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. "LCQ2: Appointment of Chairperson of Equal Opportunities Commission", Press Release, Hong Kong, 1 June 2016, Retrieved on 6 December 2017

External links[]

Retrieved from ""