Month: June 2026

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

Following is a question by the Hon Chong Ho-fung and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Logistics, Ms Mable Chan, in the Legislative Council today (June 10):

Question:

It has been reported that at the end of April this year, the Coroner’s Court delivered its verdict on a traffic accident which occurred in December 2018. In that case, the driver concerned failed to engage the handbrake properly when parking the vehicle, causing the vehicle to lurch forward and resulting in the death of five people. As the driver was not driving the vehicle at the time of the incident, he was charged with the offence of “leaving a vehicle without a fixed parking brake”, and was eventually fined $2,000 and had his driving licence suspended for six months, without being charged with a more serious offence. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it has compiled statistics on the number of traffic accidents caused by drivers failing to engage the handbrake properly (regardless of whether the drivers concerned were driving the vehicles at the time of the incidents) in the past five years; if the drivers concerned were convicted, of the offences involved and the penalties handed down respectively; and

(2) as that there are views that the penalties for the offence of “leaving a vehicle without a fixed parking brake” which causes casualties cannot reflect the seriousness of such incidents, and it has been reported that the Coroner, when adjudicating the aforesaid 2018 case, pointed out legislative loopholes and recommended that the authorities should discuss legislative amendments with the relevant departments expeditiously, whether the authorities will, in response to this recommendation, study amending the legislation to ensure that the penalties can reflect the seriousness of the offence, thereby increasing the deterrent effect; if so, of the details and the timetable; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

The Government attaches great importance to road safety and continues to enhance it through legislation, law enforcement, publicity and public education. Regarding the question raised by the Hon Chong Ho-fung, having consulted the Hong Kong Police Force, our reply is as follows:

(1) Statistics on traffic accidents caused by drivers failing to properly engage the handbrake over the past five years are listed in the Annex. The Police do not maintain categorised statistics on prosecution results and penalties of relevant cases.

(2) In cases where traffic accidents are caused by failure to properly engage the handbrake, law enforcement agencies will consider the most appropriate offence for prosecution, depending on the specific circumstances, relevant evidence, and legal advice of each case.

In fact, on March 6 this year, the District Court sentenced a driver in connection with a serious traffic accident that occurred in the Soho district of Central in December 2021. In the case, a private car driver, while parking her vehicle on a slope, failed to properly engage the brakes and use the correct gear before leaving the vehicle, causing it to roll backwards, fatally crushing a pedestrian and injuring several others. The court ultimately convicted the driver of “causing death by dangerous driving” and “causing grievous bodily harm by dangerous driving”, sentencing her to 27 months’ imprisonment and imposing a five-year driving disqualification. The District Court held that a person can be convicted of dangerous driving if it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the way he or she drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and it would be obvious to a careful and competent driver that driving in that way would be dangerous. This case illustrates that even if a driver has left the vehicle, failure to properly control it during the course of driving (including the parking process) still falls within the scope of current legislation on “dangerous driving”.

Current legislation already prescribes deterrent penalties for the aforementioned offences. The maximum penalty for “dangerous driving” is a fine of HK$25,000 and imprisonment for three years. If dangerous driving causes grievous bodily harm to another person, the maximum penalty is a fine of HK$50,000 and imprisonment for seven years; and if dangerous driving causes death to another person, the maximum penalty is a fine of HK$50,000 and imprisonment for 10 years.

The Transport Department will continue to work with the Police and the Road Safety Council to strengthen publicity and public education through various channels, especially reminding drivers of the precautions required when driving and parking on slopes. These include engaging the handbrake when parking on slopes, using the correct gear, and turning the steering wheel in the correct direction to prevent the vehicle from rolling backwards or forwards, thereby ensuring road safety.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

Following is a question by the Hon Dennis Leung and a written reply by the Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Chris Sun, in the Legislative Council today (June 10):

Question:

The Government has been implementing the Labour Importation Scheme for the Construction Sector and the Enhanced Supplementary Labour Scheme (ESLS) one after the other since 2023, and has introduced lift/escalator technicians into the Technical Professionals List (TP List) under the General Employment Policy (GEP) and the Admission Scheme for Mainland Talents and Professionals (ASMTP) with effect from June 30, 2025. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the respective numbers of workers in the following trades in the lift and escalator industry who were imported under the Labour Importation Scheme for the Construction Sector from 2025 to March 2026: (i) lift and escalator mechanics (master), (ii) lift mechanics, (iii) escalator mechanics, and (iv) lift/escalator technicians (set out in Table 1);

Table 1

Numbers of quotas approved in the lift and escalator industry under the Labour Importation Scheme for the Construction Sector
Year	(i)	(ii)	(iii)	(iv)	Total
2025
January to March 2026
Total

(2) given that ESLS allows employers in specified industries, including the electrical and electronics industries, to apply to import workers at technician level or below, subject to relevant requirements, of the respective numbers of the following skilled workers in the electrical and electronics industries who were imported annually under ESLS from 2023 to March 2026: (i) electricians (electrical industry), (ii) mechanical fitters (electrical industry), (iii) refrigeration/air-conditioning/ventilation technicians (electrical industry), (iv) mechanical engineering technicians (electrical industry), (v) building services mechanics (electrical industry), (vi) electrical fitters (electrical industry), (vii) electronics technicians (electrical industry), and (viii) electricians (electronics industry) (set out in Table 2);

Table 2

Numbers of skilled workers in the electrical and electronics industries who were admitted under ESLS (certain posts)
Common posts (industrial category)	2023	2024	2025	January to March 2026	Total
(i)
…
(viii)
Total

(3) given that while ESLS currently does not accept applications for importation of labour of industries and job categories covered by the Labour Importation Scheme for the Construction Sector, some members of the sector have relayed that some of the skilled workers in the electrical and electronics industries who were imported under ESLS have taken up posts in the lift and escalator industry, of the respective numbers of the following skilled workers who were imported annually under ESLS but were actually employed by registered lift and escalator contractors from 2023 to March 2026: (i) electricians (electrical industry), (ii) mechanical fitters (electrical industry), (iii) refrigeration/air-conditioning/ventilation technicians (electrical industry), (iv) mechanical engineering technicians (electrical industry), (v) building services mechanics (electrical industry), (vi) electrical fitters (electrical industry), (vii) electronics technicians (electrical industry), and (viii) electricians (electronics industry) (set out in Table 3); 

Table 3

Numbers of skilled workers employed by 42 registered lift and escalator contractors under ESLS
Common posts (industrial category)	2023	2024	2025	January to March 2026	Total
(i)
…
(viii)
Total

(4) whether any cases of non-compliance have been identified among applicants and imported workers since 2023 (i.e. cases in which skilled workers in the electrical and electronics industries who were imported under ESLS have taken up posts in the lift and escalator industry); if so, of the penalties imposed in respect of such cases; and

(5) of the respective numbers of workers in the following trades in the lift and escalator industry who were imported via the TP List under GEP and ASMTP from 2025 to March 2026: (i) lift technicians, (ii) escalator technicians, and (iii) lift/escalator technicians (set out in Table 4)?

Table 4

Numbers of approvals in the lift and escalator industry under GEP and ASMTP (Technical Professionals Stream)
Year	(i)	(ii)	(iii)	Total
2025
January to March 2026
Total

Reply:

President,

To cope with the challenges brought by manpower shortage and foster Hong Kong’s economic development, the Government, on the principle of ensuring employment priority for local workers, suitably allows employers with genuine difficulty in recruiting suitable local workers to apply for importation of workers. Apart from launching sector-specific labour importation schemes for the transport sector and residential care homes for the elderly and residential care homes for persons with disabilities, the Development Bureau (DEVB) has implemented the Labour Importation Scheme for the Construction Sector (Construction Sector Scheme) since July 17, 2023. The Labour Department (LD) has also implemented the Enhanced Supplementary Labour Scheme (ESLS) since September 4, 2023, to allow employers with genuine needs to apply for importation of workers for posts that were generally excluded under the previous Supplementary Labour Scheme.

The Government has all along adopted a multi-pronged approach to address manpower demands in the construction sector, enhancing training and promoting the use of technology to uplift productivity and mitigate labour shortage. The Construction Sector Scheme is a complementary measure whereby main contractors and subcontractor employers must conduct local recruitment as required and demonstrate that they are unable to employ sufficient local workers before their applications are considered. All imported workers must also comply with the same qualification and job requirements, median wages, etc, as local workers in similar positions. These measures safeguard the employment priority of local workers. When processing each application under the Construction Sector Scheme, the DEVB scrutinises whether the applicant has conducted local recruitment as per the requirements promulgated by the Government and failed to employ the required skilled workers, whether there is genuine need for importing skilled workers for the project taking into consideration factors including project progress, the demand for each relevant trade and its manpower situation, as well as the overall labour market situation before determining whether to approve quotas.

On the other hand, in the face of an ageing workforce and a lack of new entrants, some skilled trades that are critical to sustaining Hong Kong’s city operation are facing acute talent succession gaps. To improve the demographic structure in these skilled trades, in addition to continuing to strengthen the training for local technical professionals, the Government has introduced a new channel under the General Employment Policy (GEP) and the Admission Scheme for Mainland Talents and Professionals (ASMTP) from June 30, 2025, to allow young and non-degree mid-level professionals with qualifications and experience as specified in the Technical Professional List to apply to come to Hong Kong, and attract them to settle in Hong Kong in the long run. The new channel covers eight specified skilled trades, including lift/escalator technicians.

In consultation with the DEVB and the Immigration Department, the reply to the Member’s question is as follows:

(1) Under the Construction Sector Scheme, for the three skilled worker trades related to the lift and escalator industry (namely (i) lift and escalator mechanic (master), (ii) lift mechanic, (iii) escalator mechanic) and one technician trade (namely (iv) lift/escalator technician), the number of skilled workers/technicians imported through the scheme from 2025 to March 2026 is set out at Annex 1.

(2) From 2023 to March 2026, a breakdown of the number of imported workers approved under the ESLS each year for the electrical and electronics sectors by job category is set out at Annex 2. 

(3) and (4) As required by the ESLS, imported workers (including those from the electrical and electronics sectors), upon arrival to work in Hong Kong under the ESLS, must be directly employed by the same employers for taking up the specified posts and performing specified duties at the designated workplace(s) in accordance with the requirements set out in the approvals-in-principle issued by the LD and the Standard Employment Contract. The LD does not maintain statistics on the number of imported workers employed by the registered lift and escalator contractors.

If employers are found to have breached the above requirements, other requirements of the ESLS or relevant labour and immigration laws, the LD will impose administrative sanctions on the employers concerned. Depending on the nature of the breaches, the LD will withdraw the approvals for importation of labour previously granted to employers, and refuse to process any subsequent applications for labour importation submitted by employers (with a debarment period of up to two years). Since the implementation of the ESLS and up to March 2026, the LD has imposed administrative sanctions on 35 employers for breaching the Employees’ Compensation Ordinance, occupational safety and health legislation, Immigration Ordinance or requirements of the ESLS; none of these cases involve the electrical and electronics sectors.

(5) From June 30, 2025, to March 31, 2026, the numbers of applications approved under the Technical Professionals Stream of the GEP and the ASMTP to work under the skilled trade lift/escalator technician in Hong Kong are set out at Annex 3.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     ​Following is a question by the Hon Kwok Fu-yung and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Logistics, Ms Mable Chan, in the Legislative Council today (June 10):

     As Tsing Ma Bridge is the only land transport link connecting Lantau Island and the urban areas, with the continuous growth of the population and traffic flow in North Lantau, the capacity of Tsing Ma Bridge and the carrying capacity of its surrounding road network have aroused concern. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     ​Following is a question by the Hon Jimmy Ng and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Logistics, Ms Mable Chan, in the Legislative Council today (June 10):

Question:
 
     To enhance the competitiveness of Hong Kong’s logistics industry and support the logistics industry in nurturing more professional talents, the Government launched the Pilot Subsidy Scheme for Third-party Logistics Service Providers (the Pilot Scheme) in 2020 and the Professional Training on Smart and Green Logistics Scheme (the Training Scheme) in 2024, and enhanced the aforesaid two schemes in 2023 and 2024 respectively. Some members of the industry have relayed that the Government should consider further enhancing the two schemes in due course. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council: 
(2) whether it will inject further funds into the Pilot Scheme and regularise the scheme; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; whether it will further raise the funding ceiling for the Pilot Scheme following the enhancement measures in 2024, and extend the eligibility criteria for service providers from local suppliers to international suppliers; if so, the details; if not, the reasons for that;
 
(3) of the total number of logistics practitioners who have received funding to undertake courses since the launch of the Training Scheme, and the average amount of funding per approved application; whether the funding ceiling for the Training Scheme and the funding ratios for course fees will be raised; if so, the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(4) whether the authorities will collaborate with universities and vocational training organisations to design more specialised logistics-related training courses, so as to cover emerging technologies such as transport management and warehouse management systems, Robotic Process Automation, automated storage and retrieval system, and Internet of Things sensors; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     The Government attaches great importance to the development of Hong Kong’s logistics industry and has all along been supporting and enhancing Hong Kong’s position as an international logistics hub. To this end, the Government promulgated the Action Plan on Modern Logistics Development in 2023, which sets out eight strategies and 24 action measures following five development directions, namely smart development, modernisation, green and sustainability, internationalisation and facilitation, to address the short, medium and long-term needs of the logistics industry, thereby achieving the goal of developing Hong Kong into a sustainable international smart logistics hub focusing on high-value goods and the e-commerce market. 
     The reply in response to Hon Jimmy Ng’s question is as follows: 
 
(1) and (2) The Government has all along been committed to facilitating application of subsidies by the industry while ensuring prudent use of public funds. The current application procedures and required documents are mainly used to verify the eligibility of applicant enterprises and ensure the projects under application fall within the scope of the scheme. As the Secretariat of the Pilot Scheme, the Hong Kong Productivity Council (HKPC) has been providing one-on-one advisory services and organising webinars to explain the scheme’s details and successful cases, as well as operating a dedicated enquiry hotline and email, so as to help applicants understand the application process of the Pilot Scheme and hence to expedite the application handling process. The Government and the HKPC will review the operational arrangements of the Pilot Scheme continually.
 
     As regards the eligibility of service providers, the Pilot Scheme currently requires that service providers must be companies registered in Hong Kong, so as to ensure that logistics enterprises can receive timely and appropriate local installation and technical support services during project implementation. The Pilot Scheme does not impose any specific requirements on the place of origin of the solutions. 
     The Government will continue to review the implementation and effectiveness of the Pilot Scheme, and will explore the feasibility of additional capital injection into and regularisation of the Pilot Scheme at a suitable juncture.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

     Following is a question by the Hon Elaine Chik and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Logistics, Ms Mable Chan, in the Legislative Council today (June 10):

Question:

     The Public Bus Services Regulations (Cap. 230) (the Regulations) regulate the conduct of bus drivers and passengers. It has been reported that in recent years, a number of incidents involving disputes among bus enthusiasts, between passengers and bus enthusiasts, and between bus enthusiasts and bus captains have occurred in succession and adversely affected the traffic safety of buses and the order inside bus compartments. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the respective numbers of bus drivers and passengers prosecuted for contravening the Regulations in each of the past five years; and in such prosecution cases, of the irregularities committed respectively by the bus drivers and passengers involved, and the provisions of the Regulations contravened;

(2) whether the authorities have assessed the trend of those incidents that compromise traffic safety, and whether the penalties prescribed in the Regulations are effective in dealing with common conduct that compromises traffic safety; whether the authorities will consider amending the legislation to enhance protection for bus captains and maintain order inside bus compartments; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(3) given that at present, the Regulations also regulate the general conduct of passengers and intending passengers in addition to the general conduct of driver, but they do not cover other persons such as those who take photographs or videos on roads and thereby obstruct or interfere with the workings of buses, whether the authorities will review the legislation to enhance the regulation of conduct that obstructs or interferes with the workings of buses; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(4) apart from taking enforcement action, what specific measures (such as publicity and education, or strengthening collaboration with bus companies) have been put in place by the authorities to prevent the recurrence of those incidents that compromise traffic safety, in particular to reduce conduct that obstructs or interferes with the workings of a bus while it is in motion, so as to ensure the safety of drivers, passengers and other road users?
  
Reply:

     The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government has always attached great importance to the operational safety of franchised buses as well as the safety of passengers and other road users. Also, it has been working with franchised bus operators (FBOs) through various measures to enhance the safety awareness of bus captains and passengers. Having consulted the Hong Kong Police Force (HKPF), our response to the questions raised by the Hon Chik is as follows:
 
(1) to (3) At present, the Public Bus Services Regulations (Hong Kong Legislation Cap. 230A) (the Regulations) prescribe the requirements in respect of behaviours that obstruct buses or bus captains, so as to ensure driving safety and smooth operation of franchised bus services. Regulation 13A stipulates that no passenger or intending passenger shall wilfully obstruct, impede or distract the bus captain, or improperly interfere with the bus body and its workings. Any person, who contravenes the relevant provisions without reasonable excuse, commits an offence and is liable to a fine of $3,000 and imprisonment for six months. Regulation 13 also authorises a bus captain to remove from a bus any person whom he has reasonable cause to believe has contravened the relevant regulations, to require that person to give his name and address and produce proof of identity, and where necessary, to detain such person until he can be handed over to a police officer.

     Regarding persons who take photographs or videos on roads and thereby obstruct or interfere with the operations of buses, the existing legislation also covers the misbehaviour of pedestrians on roads that endangers their own safety or that of any other person. According to section 48 of the Road Traffic Ordinance (Cap. 374), a pedestrian, who in using any road negligently endangers his own safety or that of any other person, commits an offence and is liable to a fine of $2,000. The HKPF does not keep the numbers of bus captains, passengers and pedestrians prosecuted for contravening the Regulations or the relevant requirements under the Road Traffic Ordinance mentioned above.

(4) The Transport Department (TD) is much concerned about the disturbance faced by franchised bus captains while on duty. The TD has all along been maintaining close communication with FBOs and provided them with training video materials for bus captains’ reference. The materials mainly cover how bus captains should respond to various possible situations on buses, including skills for handling emergencies or dealing with passenger behaviours that may endanger driving safety, as well as emotional and psychological well-being of bus captains themselves. In addition, the TD convenes regular meetings with FBOs to remind them to monitor whether frontline bus captains encounter disturbance when carrying out driving duties and, where necessary, report to the police for assistance in a timely manner. The Government also collaborates with the Road Safety Council on publicity initiatives from time to time to remind the public of road safety.

     In parallel, FBOs have adopted various measures to assist their bus captains and frontline staff (including regulators and inspectors) in enhancing their skills and capabilities to handle various situations. For instance, their training courses have placed greater emphasis on customer service and communication skills, as well as ways to handle passenger complaints. Furthermore, FBOs have stepped up public education efforts regarding passenger conduct and guidelines, including by displaying notices inside bus compartments to remind passengers not to wilfully impede captains. CCTV systems have been installed at bus termini and inside bus compartments to monitor service operations and compartment situations. When necessary, FBOs will provide the footage of the relevant CCTV systems to law enforcement departments to assist in their investigations.

     The TD will continue to maintain close communication with FBOs and relevant government departments, and to take appropriate measures to ensure safe operation of the franchised buses.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

     Following is a question by Professor the Hon Alex Fan and a written reply by the Secretary for Justice, Mr Paul Lam, SC, in the Legislative Council today (June 10):
 
Question:
 
     On March 26, 2025, the Hainan Provincial People’s Government and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government signed the Hainan Provincial People’s Government and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government Memorandum of Cooperation (MoC), under which both sides agreed to deepen collaboration in five areas, namely trade and investment, finance, safe and orderly flow of data, tourism and talent exchanges. According to Article 12 of the MoC and its Annex, “List of recognised Hong Kong professional qualifications”, Hainan Province recognises the professional qualifications of Hong Kong solicitors (limited to representatives in the representative offices set up by the HKSAR law firms in Hainan), solicitors seconded by the Hong Kong side of the partnership association and Hong Kong solicitors employed by such partnership association, as well as Hong Kong solicitors and barristers working as consultants in Mainland law firms in Hainan. The MoC allows them to provide relevant professional services to enterprises and residents in Hainan Free Trade Port based on their Hong Kong professional qualifications, subject to the requirement that they “shall not undertake any Mainland legal matters”. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the number of (i) representative offices set up by Hong Kong law firms in Hainan, (ii) solicitors seconded by the Hong Kong side of the partnership association, and the respective numbers of (iii) Hong Kong solicitors and barristers employed as legal consultants in Mainland law firms in Hainan since the signing of the MoC; whether the Government has compiled statistics on the business areas in which Hong Kong legal professionals provide their legal services in Hainan and the revenue involved;
 
(2) given that the MoC allows Hong Kong solicitors to provide services based on their Hong Kong professional qualifications but they “shall not undertake any Mainland legal matters”, how the relevant restriction is specifically enforced; whether the HKSAR Government and the Department of Justice of Hainan Province have formulated clear practice directions or frequently asked questions in this regard; if the contract in question adopts any law other than the Mainland law (e.g. Hong Kong law) as the applicable law, whether Hong Kong solicitors providing services in Hainan based on their Hong Kong professional qualifications can take part in the drafting and review of such contracts, and whether Hong Kong solicitors can provide legal services relating to the design of the organisational structure of cross-boundary investment in Hainan; and
 
(3) given that Article 5 of the Several Provisions on the Development of International Commercial Arbitration in Hainan Free Trade Port and Article 86 of the newly revised Arbitration Law of the People’s Republic of China expressly allow foreign arbitration institutions to establish representative offices in Hainan Free Trade Port, whether the Government is aware if any Hong Kong arbitration institutions have applied or are applying to establish representative offices in Hainan to date; whether the Government is aware of any specific obstacles involved (such as the actual operational threshold of the registration process, restrictions on business areas, taxation arrangements and reputation requirements, etc); whether the Government will take the initiative to ascertain the willingness of Hong Kong arbitration institutions and law firms to establish a presence in Hainan and the difficulties encountered, and liaise with the Department of Justice of Hainan Province and relevant departments to assist Hong Kong arbitration institutions and law firms in implementing the specific arrangements for establishing a presence in Hainan; if so, of the details and timetable; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     In response to the questions raised by Professor the Hon Alex Fan, the reply is as follows:
 
(1) Currently, one Hong Kong law firm has established a representative office in Hainan before the Hainan Provincial People’s Government and Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government Memorandum of Cooperation (MoC) was signed. Hong Kong law firms have also established three partnership associations with Mainland law firms in Hainan, where five Hong Kong solicitors have been seconded by the Hong Kong law firms. Besides, 16 Hong Kong solicitors are employed as legal consultants by Mainland law firms in Hainan. The Government does not have statistics on the business scope and relevant income in respect of Hong Kong legal professionals’ provision of legal services in Hainan.
 
(2) Under the framework of the Mainland and Hong Kong Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA), Hong Kong solicitors and barristers can provide legal services on the Mainland, while the scope of legal matters that can be handled by them is subject to restrictions under the relevant laws and regulations of the Mainland. These restrictions are reflected in the references to Hong Kong solicitors and barristers providing legal services based on their Hong Kong professional qualifications in the Hainan Free Trade Port under items 44 and 45 of the Recognised Hong Kong Professional Qualifications List annexed to the MoC.
 
     According to the Measures for the Management of Hong Kong Legal Practitioners and Macao Practising Lawyers Employed by Mainland Law Firms as Legal Consultants (Measures for the Management of Legal Consultants) and the Measures for the Management of Representative Offices set up by Law Firms of the Hong Kong and Macao Special Administrative Regions on the Mainland (Measures for the Management of Representative Offices) promulgated by the Ministry of Justice, Hong Kong legal practitioners employed as legal consultants in Hainan, as well as representative offices of Hong Kong law firms in Hainan and their representatives, are not allowed to handle Mainland legal matters. Further, according to the Trial Measures on Hong Kong Law Firms and Macao Law Firms Operating in the Form of Partnership Association with Hainan Law Firms (Hainan Trial Measures on Partnership Association) promulgated by the Department of Justice of the Hainan Province, Hong Kong solicitors seconded to or hired by partnership associations in Hainan are not allowed to handle Mainland legal matters either. Whether Hong Kong law firms and legal practitioners can take part in the drafting and reviewing of contracts as well as provide cross-boundary investment framework planning services in Hainan as mentioned in the question would depend on the actual circumstances; provided that the above-mentioned restrictions under the laws and regulations of the Mainland are complied with, Hong Kong law firms and legal practitioners would be able to provide the relevant services.
 
     As to the actual enforcement of the above restrictions, Hong Kong law firms and legal practitioners are subject to management and supervision or annual review by the judicial administrative authorities of the Mainland in accordance with the provisions of the Measures for the Management of Legal Consultants, the Measures for the Management of Representative Offices and/or the Hainan Trial Measures on Partnership Association. In case Hong Kong law firms and legal practitioners handle Mainland legal matters in violation of the requirements under the said laws and regulations, they may be subject to sanctions by the relevant authorities of the Mainland.
 
     With a view to facilitating the legal sector’s and the public’s understanding of the initiatives under CEPA which concern legal services, relevant information, including frequently asked questions, is available on the DoJ’s website. For details, please visit www.doj.gov.hk/en/mainland_and_macao/cepa.html.
 
(3) Arbitral institutions in Hong Kong operate independently, and may develop their business of their own accord, without government intervention. If a Hong Kong arbitration institution plans to establish offices in Hainan or other regions, it is not required to report to the Government. Therefore, the Government currently has no information as to whether any Hong Kong arbitral institution has already applied, or is in the process of applying to establish offices in Hainan, or whether there are any specific obstacles in this regard.
 
     The Government has always supported and encouraged Hong Kong arbitral institutions to establish branches or offices on the Mainland to provide professional arbitration services to the country, while deepening Hong Kong’s position as an international legal and dispute resolution services centre. For example, when the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre established representative offices in Shanghai in 2015 and Beijing in 2024 respectively, the then- and current Secretary for Justice respectively attended the opening ceremonies and delivered speeches in Shanghai and Beijing in person.
 
     The Government has maintained close co-operation and regular communication with the Hong Kong legal and dispute resolution sector (including law firms and arbitral institutions). Should it be learnt that a Hong Kong arbitration institution or law firm encounters difficulties in establishing offices in Hainan, the Government will render suitable assistance, such as liaising with the Department of Justice of the Hainan Province and relevant authorities.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region