Concerning the Review Procedure of the Hong Kong Magistrate

4 pts
Ladies and Gentlemen, today, our dear opponents have proven themselves to be highly persistent and they cling dearly onto their misguided ideas.

Legal Principle (cannot judge himself) *
First of all, our dear opponents have implied that the Review Procedure (violates the legal principle of “one cannot be his own judge”/ is not reliable because the Magistrate is judging itself).  
However, let me assure you that the Review Procedure is not advocating self-judgment, but rather, it is advocating reflective evaluation that can allow flaws made in cases to be corrected, thus preserving justice. Are our opponents suggesting that justice is negligible? I surely hope not.

Biased opinions (goes with above) *
Our dear opponents have, by their previous point, implied that the Review Procedure would advocate decisions made according to the magistrate’s biased opinions.   This will lead to the perversion of justice, or so they claim.
If the Review Procedure is abolished; all appeals of cases would be left to defendants or the accusers. And while defendants would only file appeals if they themselves feel that the judgments they have received are illegitimate, accusers would only file appeals if the judgments the defendant received are illegitimate according to the accusers. Therefore, all types of appeals in this case are based on personal interests.   Does this mean our opponents are suggesting that no appeals whatsoever should be made, by any given means?
Besides, if a magistrate proceeds to file an appeal against its own case, it means that they have noticed something wrong about the case or have been presented with new perspectives or evidence, and our opponents have failed to take notice of this obvious point.

Unnecessary, 61 *
Our dear opponents have also implied that the Review Procedure is unnecessary or even detrimental due to certain risks; otherwise they would not have wanted it to be...