Daily Lessons from Life 28 March 2012 - Hong Kong court overturns maid residency ruling

"Hong Kong court overturns maid residency ruling - AFP 28 March 2012

HONG KONG: Hong Kong's court of appeal on Wednesday overturned a landmark ruling that opened the door for thousands of foreign maids to claim residency in the southern Chinese city.

"It must be up to the sovereign authority to decide the extent to which the status of permanent resident should be conceded to foreign nationals," Judge Andrew Cheung wrote in a 66-page judgement accepting the government's appeal.

The High Court ruled on September 30 last year that Philippine domestic worker Evangeline Banao Vallejos had the right to request permanent residency status, something that had been denied to foreign maids until then.

But the government argued that the authorities had discretionary power to decide who was eligible for residency, rejecting arguments that restrictions on maids were unconstitutional and discriminatory.

The three-judge panel on the court of appeal unanimously accepted that argument, saying the High Court could not override the government's authority to decide who can live in the city and who cannot.

The decision will come as a major blow to tens of thousands of maids who could have been eligible for residency status if the Vallejos case had been established in law.

"It is a fundamental principle in international law that a sovereign state has the power to admit, exclude and expel aliens," Cheung wrote.

Vallejos's lawyers were not present in court but they have previously indicated they will take the case to Hong Kong's highest court, the Court of Final Appeal, if necessary.

Some officials have warned of a deluge of permanent residency requests if the Vallejos precedent is allowed to stand. But government figures of applications from 1998 to 2011 show no significant uptick since September."

It comes as no surprise to me that the lower court's decision was overturned. I am not surprise too that the protagonists will take the case to the highest court too.

Lessons for me are:

1. what does residency means? does it mean more benefits to the maids and expenses on the government to provide these benefits to the 'new' residents? If so, it is a real economic challenge;

2. IF NOT, will there even be a fight?;

3. Hong Kong SAR and many other territories or countries practiced 'selective discrimination' using economic measurement. If there is no 'economic conflict of interests', there will rarely be any fights or objectiions to any decisions as NOBODY cares! The challenge is: to go with a fundamental principle that 'all man are equal' or to go with the 'consequence' principle of 'what will create the greatest good for the majority of the people while minimizing the violation of the minority'? That will decide if the choice is right or wrong. So, both can be 'right' or 'wrong' simply because of the fundamental principle used to measure such a decision.

In a pragmatic and materialistic Hong Kong SAR, the choice is quite obvioius - consequences >> fundamental principle! Hands down. No contest!!