The government is challenging a High Court decision to allow male prisoners to grow their hair out by arguing that men are dirtier than women and could use their flowing locks as a weapon.
Those incredibly compelling arguments were made by lawyer Stewart Wong today as he represented the government in its appeal of a High Court ruling in January that declared mandatory haircuts unconstitutional. At the time, the court said the shearing represented a form of sexual discrimination as women were not required to do the same.
The legal brouhaha started when disqualified lawmaker Leung Kwok-hung — popularly known as “Longhair” for his signature locks — won a judicial review against the Correctional Services Department after complaining that only male inmates had to have their hair cut.
The government is now challenging that decision by arguing that long hair can be used to hide items such as drugs, to commit suicide with, or as a weapon, RTHK reports.
We know what you’re thinking. How exactly can long hair be used as a weapon? Glad you asked. Let Jacky Wu from the movie Tai Chi II demonstrate.
Wong added that it is a statistical fact that male inmates are more prone to violence, and that they also have lower levels of hygiene than female inmates.
According to the SCMP, Wong said that “security, discipline, conformity and rehabilitation are all matters of concern.” He then went on to say that while Leung has the right to be protected, he “has a corresponding obligation to be part of the security which benefits everyone.”
In 2012, Leung was found guilty of two charges of criminal damage and two of disorderly behavior for damaging a door when he and about 100 protesters stormed a public forum on plans to scrap Legislative Council by-elections.
He was eventually jailed for four weeks in 2014 and had to have his signature locks shorn.
