Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Travel document procurement

Legal area

Court

31 Mar 2025

HATTANAGE MOLEEN RAMANI v. HONG KONG SAR GOVERNMENT

Citation

[2025] HKCFI 1337
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL474/2025

Detention was lawful and not unreasonable because it was authorised by ss.32(3A) and 29(1) IO, the Director intended to deport and acted with reasonable diligence to obtain travel documents and priority for the subsequent NRC, a valid travel document and a scheduled repatriation flight existed, and the applicant's history and stated unwillingness to return created a real risk of absconding such that release was not warranted.
6 Dec 2023

SHARIFUL ISLAM v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3138
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1937/2023

The Applicant's prolonged detention remained lawful because the majority of the delay was self-inflicted by his persistent refusal to cooperate in obtaining the required travel document, the Director demonstrated reasonable diligence in pursuing issuance of the document with the Bangladesh Consulate General and there was a realistic prospect of removal within a reasonable period (about three months), coupled with a significant risk of abscondence; accordingly Hardial Singh requirements were satisfied and the habeas corpus application was dismissed.
14 Sept 2023

AHMED KHAWAJA v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 2348
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL1438/2023

Detention remained lawful because a valid deportation order was in force, the applicant repeatedly refused to cooperate in obtaining a travel document thereby causing delay, the Director acted with reasonable diligence and removal was imminent, so continued detention was not unreasonable or arbitrary and the habeas corpus application must be dismissed.
2 Mar 2023

MD AL AMIN v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 660
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCAL179/2023

The court found that the detention was lawfully authorised by section 32(3A) and that HS1–HS4 were satisfied: the Director intended to deport the applicant, had acted with reasonable diligence in pursuing a replacement travel document with the Bangladesh Consulate, removal remained realistically achievable within a reasonable period (the Consulate estimated issuance by early April 2023), and the period of detention (about 8 months) was not unreasonable given the circumstances; accordingly the habeas corpus application was dismissed.

Hong Kong Case Law

HATTANAGE MOLEEN RAMANI v. HONG KONG SAR GOVERNMENT

SHARIFUL ISLAM v. THE DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER

AHMED KHAWAJA v. SECRETARY FOR SECURITY AND ANOTHER

MD AL AMIN v. DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION AND ANOTHER