Hong Kong's chief law enforcement official has committed to pursuing accountability "without limits" for those responsible for the Wang Fuk Court fire, asserting that criminal prosecution will proceed independently of whether witnesses choose to cooperate with an ongoing independent inquiry. Security Secretary Chris Tang Ping-keung told the South China Morning Post in an exclusive interview that evidence, rather than witness testimony at hearings, would ultimately determine criminal charges in the tragedy that claimed 168 lives, making it one of the territory's deadliest blazes in recent decades.
The November fire, which consumed seven of eight residential towers at the densely populated public housing estate in the New Territories, displaced approximately 5,000 residents and claimed one firefighter among its victims. The 43-hour inferno ravaged the compound during ongoing renovation work, highlighting systemic failures across multiple government departments in detecting and mitigating fire hazards before the disaster unfolded. Tang's declaration of prosecutorial resolve comes after the independent committee investigating the blaze announced this week that it would not pursue statutory powers to compel witnesses to testify, a decision that has alarmed survivors and residents who fear that key figures might escape accountability.
Law enforcement agencies are already prosecuting two individuals who refused to appear before the committee: Hau Wa-kin and Gordon Ho Kin-yip, both directors of Prestige Construction and Engineering, the main renovation contractor at Wang Fuk Court. Despite submitting written statements to the inquiry, both men declined to testify at public hearings, a decision that prompted their prosecution by police and the Independent Commission Against Corruption. The joint law enforcement action has charged seven individuals and two companies with 25 offences in total, encompassing manslaughter, conspiracy to defraud, money laundering, attempted obstruction of justice, and tax evasion connected to the fire.
Extensive inquiry hearings have unearthed troubling evidence of negligence and poor oversight spanning multiple agencies. Investigators revealed that contractors had covered windows with polyfoam boards, installed non-fire-retardant scaffolding mesh, and removed fireproof windows from emergency exit corridors—all modifications that significantly accelerated the fire's spread through the buildings. These discoveries have intensified scrutiny of how regulatory bodies failed to identify and halt such dangerous practices before the renovation work commenced, raising fundamental questions about the adequacy of Hong Kong's building safety oversight mechanisms.
Tang carefully balanced his accountability message with recognition of the Fire Services Department's efforts, noting that despite areas requiring improvement, firefighters had demonstrated exceptional courage and commitment. "There's no doubt they have put in 100 per cent effort," he said, acknowledging the sacrifice of the department member who perished in the blaze. This nuanced stance reflects the political sensitivity surrounding any suggestion that the disciplined services bore responsibility for the disaster, whilst simultaneously signalling that no official or department would be exempt from scrutiny if evidence warranted prosecution.
A third figure subject to investigation is district councillor Peggy Wong Pik-kiu, a former consultant to the estate's owners' committee who submitted written testimony but refused to testify in person. Multiple Wang Fuk Court residents have accused Wong of interfering with owners' meetings, intimidating those with dissenting views, and engaging in questionable proxy vote collection practices. Wong's written statement maintained that she had offered no benefits in exchange for the proxy votes she gathered before two separate meetings in 2021 and 2024, and that she had not collected any votes for the general assembly at which residents selected Prestige as their renovation contractor. Tang indicated that any prosecution of Wong or similar figures would hinge on the quality of evidence presented to prosecutors.
Regarding the committee's decision not to pursue statutory enforcement powers to compel testimony, Tang defended the approach as pragmatic and efficient. He argued that the existing inquiry structure, led by a judge, would produce results within approximately nine to ten months—a timeframe that contrasts sharply with international precedents. Tang cited the Grenfell Tower fire in London in 2017 as an instructive example of how lengthy investigations can become: the final 1,700-page report was only released in September 2024 following a six-year inquiry, with no prosecutions yet arising from the British tragedy. A preliminary phase-one report had been published in October 2019, focusing narrowly on the day of the fire and its immediate causation and spread.
Beyond the immediate fire investigation, Tang outlined his bureau's legislative agenda for the remainder of his term, which concludes next year. Two significant pieces of legislation remain pending: amendments to impose harsher penalties for sexual offences and regulations to strengthen fire safety standards across Hong Kong. These proposed reforms reflect broader governance priorities that extend beyond the Wang Fuk Court tragedy, though the fire's severity has undoubtedly accelerated attention to fire code enforcement and penalty structures.
One particularly contentious issue involves the absence of mainland Chinese firefighting assistance during the Wang Fuk Court emergency, despite existing cross-border cooperation mechanisms. Tang acknowledged that coordinating emergency response between Hong Kong, Guangdong province, and Macau requires substantial groundwork to reconcile differing standards and operational procedures. Hong Kong and its neighbouring jurisdictions signed a cooperation agreement in 2024 to enhance emergency coordination, but Tang indicated that actual firefighting assistance remains limited to flooding and landslide scenarios for the moment.
The practical obstacles to mainland firefighting support are far more complex than simple political will. Tang explained that compatibility issues ranging from power plug configurations to water source access standards must be resolved before cross-border firefighting units could operate effectively within Hong Kong. Equipment variation—from fire engine specifications to oxygen tank designs—creates cascading incompatibilities that would prevent mainland units from accessing Hong Kong's water distribution systems or charging their vehicles. These challenges exemplify the profound infrastructural gaps that persist between the systems despite their geographical proximity.
Equally significant are divergences in entry safety protocols and tactical firefighting strategies between jurisdictions, factors that Tang emphasised cannot be rushed through coordination discussions. Authorities envision a phased approach beginning with basic external water-spraying operations before progressively integrating more complex tactical coordination. Tang suggested that finalising even the initial configuration standards could be accomplished within coming months, representing a modest but meaningful step toward genuine cross-border emergency cooperation. The commitment to methodical coordination underscores how security and emergency management decisions involve technical complexity that transcends administrative boundaries, a reality that Hong Kong policymakers must navigate whilst demonstrating commitment to preventing future catastrophes like Wang Fuk Court.
