Letters | Uncovering truth of Tai Po tragedy not at odds with care for survivors

However, the review is not just about delivering justice for the victims of the incident. Equally if not more importantly, it is also about establishing what went wrong in order that similar horrendous tragedies and the pitfalls in the process of selecting contractors and consultants for renovation projects can be averted in future. To the extent that the evidence of survivors – who can give first-hand accounts – will contribute to the process, their input can be crucial, particularly to ascertaining the events on November 26 and determining the origins and escalation of the fire.

One person interviewed in the article seemed to be suggesting that the review should be held one or two years after the fire so witnesses could have ample time to go through therapy before giving evidence. One obvious and significant drawback of such a lengthy delay is that it will compromise the accuracy of the evidence given, as memory of events will almost inevitably deteriorate with time. Erroneous recollections can throw the inquiry off track, potentially resulting in wrong conclusions.

Consideration can be given to obtaining written statements from certain potential witnesses in a suitable environment and more relaxed manner so they can be spared the pressure of attending a formal hearing. Any such statements can be corroborated by evidence given by survivors who are demonstrably strong enough to attend hearings.

At the end of the article, another person interviewed said: “A balance must be struck between justice, care and compassion.” Intentionally or otherwise, this suggests that the compelling needs of holding the judge-led review must be mitigated by “care and compassion”. I hope this letter goes some way towards demonstrating that there is not necessarily a great deal of conflict between these two groups of objectives, both of which are important.