Hong Kong coroner's court to hear over 250 testimonies in 2012 Lamma ferry crash inquest
A Hong Kong court is expected to hear over 250 testimonies about the 2012 Lamma ferry crash that killed 39 people, as an inquest into the tragedy began on Tuesday.
The inquest at the coroner's court is slated to last 60 days, during which 166 testimonies will be read out, according to local media. Ninety-two witnesses will also testify either in person or via video link to recount the tragedy that happened almost 13 years ago, the reports said.
On October 1, 2012, the ferry Lamma IV collided with another vessel, Sea Smooth, off Lamma Island, leaving 39 people dead and 92 others injured.
Lamma IV, which had 126 passengers on board, was chartered by the Hong Kong Electric Company to take staff to watch the National Day Fireworks Display in the harbour. The regular passenger ferry Sea Smooth, operated by the Hong Kong and Kowloon Ferry Company, had more than 100 people on board.
Coroner Monica Chow said on Tuesday that the inquest was intended to discern the facts and would not determine civil or criminal liabilities, according to local media reports.
But the hearing would hopefully provide transparency and closure for family members of those who died in the incident, she added.
Verbal testimonies of staff members of the Hong Kong Electric Company were read out during the proceedings on Tuesday, including that of a staff member surnamed Lai, who organised the fireworks viewing event on that day.
According to his testimony given to the police, Lai said no crew members of Lamma IV or passengers had consumed alcohol that night, adding that the vessel's speed was 'normal,' while Sea Smooth was cruising at a 'rather high' speed.
Captain of Lamma IV, Chow Chi-wai, told the police that he turned his vessel to starboard in an attempt to keep away from Sea Smooth after he saw the boat coming towards Lamma IV. But Sea Smooth rammed into the port side of Lamma IV about a minute after he spotted the ship, Chow said.
The captain, who was sentenced to nine months behind bars in 2015 for endangering others' safety at sea, declined to answer police questions about whether his vessel had enough crew members to ensure safety, as well as those about the details of the incident.
The first witness is expected to take the stand on Thursday, local media reports said.
'Long overdue' closure
Families of the victims had demanded an inquest over the ferry crash for years as they sought transparency in the investigation.
The coroner's court in 2020 decided it would not investigate the incident – a decision that was challenged by some families but upheld by the city's High Court.
In 2023, the Court of Appeal overturned the decision and ordered the inquest, with three judges ruling that the open court proceedings could bring 'long overdue' closure for the families.
The judges also outlined six issues to be resolved at the inquest, including whether the Marine Department had failed to identify faults in the construction and design of both vessels during its regular inspections.
Lai Sai-ming, the captain of Sea Smooth, was jailed for eight years in 2015 for 39 counts of manslaughter and for endangering others' safety at sea.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
HKFP
7 hours ago
- HKFP
Hong Kong Federation of Students refutes rumours of dissolution, says ‘unknown parties' impersonated group
The Hong Kong Federation of Students (HKFS) has refuted rumours of dissolution after local media outlets reported its disbandment, citing a statement issued by 'an emergency general meeting' of the student group. Isaac Lai, the vice president of Lingnan University Students' Union (LUSU) and the chief representative of the HKFS, said in a statement issued on Wednesday evening that 'some unknown parties' had impersonated the student group to announce that it would be dissolved. 'The HKFS is composed of student unions from higher education institutions in Hong Kong. We have not received any requests for dissolution from any student union member,' Lai said in a Chinese-language statement. 'We hereby clarify that there is no dissolution.' Lai said that, according to the HKFS constitution, dissolution of the organisation must be approved by its executive committee and supported by at least three-quarters of the representatives in the general assembly to become effective. HK01 reported on Wednesday evening that the HKFS would be 'dissolved immediately,' citing a statement sent on behalf of the student group to some local outlets via email. The purported statement said Lai and fellow federation member Charles Ng were suspected of transferring all funds from bank accounts under the HKFS without approval after the duo applied to the police in September 2023 to name themselves as the responsible persons for the student group and altered the signature information for all its bank accounts. It also said that, considering that Lai and Ng were among the four current and former LUSU members arrested earlier in June, the student group decided to dissolve, and its assets would be donated to the Community Chest. Police said the four were arrested on suspicion of stealing HK$1.3 million from the LUSU's funds for personal expenses. HK01 reported in November that a self-proclaimed Lingnan University student accused LUSU members of embezzlement in a mass email to the school. Lai denied the accusation at that time. Ongoing dispute Rumours of dissolution came amid an ongoing dispute between HKFS representatives and some pro-Beijing figures claiming to represent the HKFS Fund, a limited company related to the student group. The HKFS, established in 1958, is a registered society under the Police Licensing Office. In 2015, the federation explained the origins of the H.K.F.S. Fund, saying it was established after the sale of Hong Kong Student Travel Ltd by Hong Kong Student Travel Bureau Ltd in 1993. The travel bureau earned HK$23 million from that sale, HK$5 million of which was injected into the federation, while the remaining HK$18 million was managed by the travel bureau and later renamed the H.K.F.S. Fund Ltd. In November 2023, HKFS representatives filed a police report after suspecting a group of unknown men had tried to forcefully enter two of its properties. Prior to the alleged forced entry, the HKFS accused pro-establishment lawmaker Ma Fung-kwok, a director at the H.K.F.S. Fund, and other directors of 'forcibly seizing control of the company' by launching legal proceedings against several former executives of the student group and requesting them to move out of the two units. Lawyer Paul Tse, who helped launch the legal proceedings against the HKFS, told Ming Pao that the lawsuit had been filed because there was evidence showing the premises in question had been 'misused' for activities that violated the national security law. In the Wednesday statement, Lai said that Ma and Simon Hau, a pro-Beijing businessman and secretary of the H.K.F.S. Fund, had 'legally occupied' two properties belonging to the student group. On Thursday, Lai went to the HKFS headquarters in Waitex House, Mong Kok, which has been occupied by pro-Beijing figures since 2023. He still could not enter because the office lock had been changed. The acrylic signboard outside the office had also been removed. Three metal signboards are now placed outside the entrance door: one with the HKFS name, and the other two reading 'Stability of Hong Kong' and 'Realisation of Chinese Dream.' According to the statement, Lai and other HKFS representatives filed a lawsuit in March at the High Court against Ma and Hau, demanding that the two immediately return the properties. The legal proceedings are still ongoing, it said.
HKFP
05-06-2025
- HKFP
4 Lingnan University students arrested over alleged HK$1 million theft
Four students at Lingnan University in Hong Kong have been arrested for allegedly stealing HK$1 million from the students' union funds. Three male students and one female student, aged 21 to 24, were arrested on Wednesday on suspicion of theft and conspiracy to steal, local media outlets reported on Thursday. The four were reportedly detained on Wednesday for investigation. A source who declined to be identified confirmed the arrests to HKFP. The Lingnan University Students' Union president, Hong Cheuk-in, declined to comment on the case. The alleged theft took place between 2024 and 2025 and involved around HK$1 million of students' union funds, according to media reports. Police are expected to meet the press on Thursday to provide more information about the investigation. HKFP has contacted Lingnan University for comment. HK01 reported in November that a self-proclaimed Lingnan University student had accused members of the students' union of embezzlement in a mass email to the school. Lai denied the accusation at that time.
Asia Times
04-06-2025
- Asia Times
Anwar's immunity bid fails in rule-of-law test for Malaysia
In a landmark June 4 ruling, Malaysia's High Court denied Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's controversial attempt to shield himself from civil proceedings by invoking a constitutional mechanism — a move critics say was a veiled attempt at political immunity. The court's rejection of Anwar's bid marks the beginning of a legal confrontation unprecedented in Malaysian history: a sitting prime minister now stands to defend himself in court while governing the nation. The decision arrives on the heels of a motion by Anwar's legal team seeking to refer eight constitutional questions to the Federal Court. These questions, according to the defense, pertained to the burdens placed on the Prime Minister's Office by an ongoing civil suit and were framed not as an immunity plea but as a request for a 'constitutional filter.' Yet the distinction was semantic at best. 'We are not claiming immunity,' Anwar's counsel asserted on June 3. 'We are simply seeking clarity to protect the executive's function.' But the subtext was clear: Anwar wanted out of the dock. The case in question — a civil suit filed by Muhammed Yusoff Rawther alleging sexual misconduct by Anwar — predates Anwar's premiership. The incident allegedly occurred in 2018, and Rawther filed the suit in 2020. Notably, Anwar did not attempt to strike out the suit at any point over the past three years. Only on May 23, 2025 — a staggering 912 days after he assumed office — did he pivot to constitutional arguments. Rawther's lawyer, Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali, minced no words in court. 'Why did the Prime Minister take 912 days to raise this issue?' he asked. 'If the matter truly affected his ability to discharge executive functions, he should have addressed it long ago.' Rafique also pointed out that Anwar's affidavit failed to provide any reason for the delay — a procedural omission that, in the eyes of many, exposed the real motivation behind the application. More damningly, Rafique invoked Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law. 'No man — not even the Prime Minister — can stand above that,' he said. 'Immunity, whether cloaked as a filter or wrapped in legalese, is still immunity.' Presiding Judge Roz Mawar Rozain dismissed all eight questions as 'untenable, abstract and speculative.' She ruled that the Federal Court need not be burdened with academic hypotheticals. The trial, she affirmed, will proceed as scheduled on June 16, and 20,000 ringgit (US$4,700) in legal costs were awarded to Rawther. Anwar's team immediately sought an urgent stay of the ruling, but it also was dismissed. They now have 30 days to file an appeal to the Court of Appeal, though the countdown to the trial has already begun. In her oral judgment, Roz Mawar made it clear: Articles 39, 40, and 43 of the Constitution — which Anwar's team cited to support their plea — contain no implicit or explicit provision for immunity. The Constitution, she emphasized, enshrines accountability, not executive insulation. Anwar's maneuver has drawn comparisons to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's 2020 attempt to sidestep legal scrutiny. Facing multiple indictments, Netanyahu petitioned the Knesset for parliamentary immunity, claiming the charges were politically motivated. While Israel's system at least provides a legal pathway for such immunity via legislative vote, Malaysia's does not. Anwar's attempt to manufacture a similar buffer through the courts was both bold and, ultimately, unsuccessful. In both cases, the public response was the same: dismay at the spectacle of a sitting prime minister attempting to rewrite the rules mid-game. Anwar's critics say his move reeks of the same hubris — a desperate attempt to evade moral reckoning while cloaked in constitutional garb. For a man who once stood as the face of Reformasi, the optics are devastating. Here is Anwar — long celebrated as a martyr of political injustice, imprisoned under Mahathir Mohamad's authoritarian regime — now attempting to insulate himself from due process using the very levers of power he once opposed. This isn't Anwar's first brush with accusations of overreach. His 1999 conviction for abuse of power — widely seen as politically charged — is now being unearthed in conversations across social media and political circles alike. History, as they say, echoes. The parallel doesn't stop there. Like Thailand's Thaksin Shinawatra — another leader accused of self-enrichment and later pardoned — Anwar has blurred the lines between public service and political dynasty. His appointment of Thaksin as ASEAN adviser and his own daughter Nurul Izzah as Deputy President of the PKR have raised questions about nepotism and political insulation, further damaging his image as a reformer. Conversely, Rawther's credibility has only been strengthened by this legal victory. He has, for years, insisted that his pursuit of justice is not politically motivated. The June 4 ruling — which affirms the legitimacy of his claim and the court's commitment to due process — lends weight to that assertion. In a political landscape often defined by backroom deals and unaccountable elites, Rawther has emerged as a symbol of perseverance — a private citizen holding the nation's most powerful man to legal scrutiny. This verdict could well reshape how Malaysia is seen on the regional stage. As the country currently chairing ASEAN, the world is watching. The failure of Anwar's immunity gambit is a litmus test of Malaysia's democratic maturity. What signal would it have sent if a sitting Prime Minister could so easily erect a legal wall around himself? The judiciary, by rejecting this narrative, has reaffirmed Malaysia's commitment to constitutional supremacy and rule of law. In Rafique's words outside the court, 'This ruling ensures that in Malaysia, no executive, no prime Minister, no monarch can place himself above the people.' This episode will linger in the nation's political memory — not just for what it reveals about Anwar's instincts, but for what it says about the resilience of Malaysia's institutions. The prime minister now finds himself in uncharted territory: governing while on trial, a dual burden with no modern precedent in Malaysia. Anwar once said, 'Justice is the soul of governance.' It remains to be seen whether he will honor that creed — or be judged by it.
