【明報專訊】THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL has passed amendments to the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, easing restrictions on land reclamation within Victoria Harbour. The principal point of contention surrounding this revision lies in the provision that, subject to the Chief Executive in Council's approval, larger-scale reclamation projects in the harbour may now proceed. While the authorities emphasise the availability of judicial review for the public, the ultimate authority for such undertakings rests with the Chief Executive and the Executive Council. It is therefore incumbent upon the authorities to act in the overriding public interest and to exercise this power with the utmost circumspection.
Victoria Harbour is not only a renowned landmark but also an iconic symbol of Hong Kong. The Protection of the Harbour Ordinance, enacted in the 1990s, stipulates that reclamation within Victoria Harbour is subject to a "presumption against reclamation". To overturn this presumption, the authorities must demonstrate an "overriding public need".
In 2003, a judicial review challenged the government's Central and Wan Chai Reclamation project. The court, citing the Harbour Ordinance, determined that any reclamation work in Victoria Harbour must satisfy three conditions: first, it must be pressing, with sufficient justification and immediate necessity; second, there must be no other viable alternatives; and third, the scope of the works must not exceed the minimum required to meet the overriding public need. These three "Victoria Harbour reclamation conditions", established by this precedent, have remained in force until now.
A key aspect of the government's current amendments to the Harbour Ordinance is the relaxation of reclamation restrictions for harbour enhancement works. If a project falls within the ambit of over ten specified facilities listed in the ordinance's schedule (such as piers, viewing decks, and breakwaters) and the total area covering Victoria Harbour does not exceed 0.8 hectares — roughly the size of a football pitch — it can be exempted from the "presumption" restrictions with the Financial Secretary's approval. Furthermore, non-permanent reclamation works that do not exceed 3 hectares in area and last no longer than seven years will also be eligible for exemption.
As for the Victoria Harbour reclamation projects not qualifying for exemption, the new amendment establishes a regulatory mechanism. Project proponents must draft a report setting out the rationale for demonstrating an "overriding public need". This report must be made public and open for public comment for 60 days before being submitted to the Chief Executive in Council for a decision on whether the project sufficiently outweighs the existing presumption against reclamation. Some questioned that this new mechanism effectively allows the Chief Executive in Council to approve large-scale Victoria Harbour reclamation projects, acting as "judge and jury" in their own cause.
Regardless of whether a large-scale reclamation project in Victoria Harbour is proposed under the old regime or the new, the legal requirement for demonstrating an overriding public need remains unchanged, and so does the judiciary's ability to strike down non-compliant proposals. However, the authorities have a responsibility to ensure that the assessment process earnestly considers public opinion, and that consultations are not reduced to a perfunctory exercise.
Given that the authorities' land policies have long tilted in favour of developers, with commercial considerations often taking precedence, public confidence in the government's commitment to avoiding unwarranted reclamation in Victoria Harbour remains fragile. This amendment has inevitably prompted unease among some citizens. The authorities must exercise their powers judiciously and must not treat the easing of reclamation restrictions as a licence to push through projects recklessly.
明報社評2025.05.08：修例放寬填海限制 保護維港初心莫變
立法會通過修訂《保護海港條例》，放寬維港填海限制。今次修例爭議較大之處，是倘若行政長官會同行政會議通過，可在維港較大規模地填海。雖然當局強調市民可以提出司法覆核，但填海大權握在特首和行會手上，當局須以公眾利益為依歸，慎用有關權力。
維多利亞港不僅是著名地標，更是香港象徵。《保護海港條例》1990年代制定，訂明維港內填海受「不可填海推定」（下稱「推定」）約束，當局必須證明具有「凌駕性的公眾需要」，才可推翻有關「推定」。
2003年，政府中環灣仔填海計劃遭司法覆核，法庭根據保港條例，指出維港填海工程必須符合三條件，包括：1）有迫切性，具充分理由及有即時需要；2）沒有其他切實可行選擇；3）工程範圍不超逾該項凌駕性公眾需要所要求的最低限度。案例所確立的「維港填海3條件」，一直適用至今。
政府今次修訂保港條例，重點之一就是放寬有關改善海港工程的填海限制，若屬條例附表所指定的10多項設施（諸如碼頭、觀景台、防波堤等），而覆蓋維港的總面積亦不超過0.8公頃，即相當於一個草地足球場大小，經財政司長批准，可豁免不受「推定」規限。另外，非永久填海工程若面積不超過3公頃、時間不超過7年，同樣可以豁免。
至於不獲豁免的維港填海工程，新例則訂下了一套規管機制，項目倡議人須就填海工程是否符合「凌駕性公眾需要」，草擬報告鋪陳理據，有關報告須公開並供公眾在60日內提出意見，再交由行政長官會同行會裁斷，該項目是否足以推翻現行條例所述不准填海的推定。有意見質疑，新機制下特首會同行會可批准維港大規模填海項目，形同「自審自批」。
無論修例前還是修例後，任何在維港推行的大規模填海工程，當局都必須提出理據，證明項目有「凌駕性的公眾需要」，而法庭也依然可以推翻政府的決定，這一點確實沒有因為修例而改變，然而當局有責任確保評估工作有認真聽取市民意見，諮詢過程不會是「求求其其」走過場。
當局土地政策長期向發展商利益傾斜，商業利益掛帥下，公眾對政府不會在維港「濫填」，始終缺乏信心。今次修例難免引發部分市民的憂慮，當局必須慎用權力，不會因填海拆牆鬆綁就亂推工程。
■ Glossary 生字 /
ambit : the range of the authority or influence of sth
perfunctory : (of an action) done as a duty or habit, without real interest, attention or feeling
judiciously : carefully and sensibly; in a way that shows good judgement