這個判詞對政府十分有利。
"Needless to say (and Mr Yu has not sought to submit otherwise), fairness requires that generally the Returning Officer should give a reasonable opportunity to the candidate to respond to any materials that the Returning Officer says are contrary to an intention to carry out the obligations under the Declaration. The Returning Officer should then take into account those responses before determining whether there are such cogent, clear and compelling materials to show objectively that the nominee plainly does not have the requisite intention despite the signed Declaration."
(note the word "generally")
"Obviously, if a candidate even refuses to sign it, it must be objectively plain that he or she does not have the requisite intention to uphold the Basic Law and the nomination must be an invalid one."
"Under section 17(b) of the EAC Regulation, if Mr Chan had applied for such an advice, the RO must also consider the advice before making the decision as to whether Mr Chan was validly nominated. But Mr Chan himself also did not apply to the NAC for an advice. Instead, he had sought legal advice from his own legal representatives, D&A. In the premises, it is difficult to see how it is open to Mr Chan to complain as a material irregularity that the RO had failed to ask for a NAC advice when he himself had similarly decided not to apply for one."
(a candidate may apply to the NAC for advice, which the RO must consider)
No comments:
Post a Comment