High Court Rejects Parents' Bid to Regain Custody of Home-Born Baby Danny
HKFP · 2 SOURCESabout 2 hours ago2 MIN
Summary
A Hong Kong court has dismissed a father's "inappropriate" application for a writ of habeas corpus seeking the return of his infant son Danny, who was born unassisted at home and has been in government custody since June. High Court Judge Queeny Au-Yeung of the Court of First Instance ruled on Wednesday that the application lacked merit, stating that Danny was not under detention but committed to the care of a government-appointed organization through a child protection order. The parents, Tsang Wai-bong and Kwan Pui-sin, who advocate for the "free birth" movement, were arrested on suspicion of child neglect for failing to register their son's birth or provide him with any medical check-ups. While the Department of Justice sought legal costs from Tsang, the judge declined to award them.
Key Points
- Tsang Wai-bong filed a habeas corpus application this month alleging his son Danny had suffered "torture," "arbitrary detention," and an "unfair trial"
- The Juvenile Court issued a three-year protection order for Danny in June after his parents were arrested for suspected child neglect
- Judge Au-Yeung stated the habeas corpus remedy applies only to detained persons and is unsuitable for child protection cases
- The infant has remained under Social Welfare Department supervision since the protection order was granted
- The couple runs a "Save Lily" social media campaign and said the incident has deterred them from having another child in Hong Kong
Why It Matters
The ruling establishes that child protection orders do not constitute detention under Hong Kong law, potentially affecting how future custody challenges are pursued. The case also highlights ongoing tensions between parental rights advocates and child welfare authorities in Hong Kong regarding home birthing practices and birth registration requirements .
The ruling establishes that child protection orders do not constitute detention under Hong Kong law, potentially affecting how future custody challenges are pursued. The case also highlights ongoing tensions between parental rights advocates and child welfare authorities in Hong Kong regarding home birthing practices and birth registration requirements .