RUDMAN'S CITY - WONG'S JUDGES DID NOT ASK 'PRISON' RESIDENTS

United States drug-busters are not the only ones who were highly upset when
Auckland courts freed alleged heroin dealer Hing Hung Wong on bail pending
extradition hearings.

The co-owners of the apartment block where Wong is under "house arrest" are
equally furious, if for rather different reasons.

While the Americans worry that he may escape, his neighbours worry about
what could happen to them and their property if he does escape.

They say that if the lawyer acting for the United States is correct in her
claims that Wong "has a history of previous violence when his organisation
has been threatened," and that he could try to escape, then their lives are
in danger.

Not only do they want him out, but they want to know why the judges
involved, Judge Kerr in the District Court and Justice Morris in the High
Court, did not seek the views of the body corporate - the legal entity that
has overall control of the apartment block - before agreeing that Wong
could be held under guard in the building.

They also want to know why the judges did not consider the body corporate
rules before turning their block into a prison.

For incredible as it may seem, the first time anyone living in the large,
modern, high-rise apartment building knew their home had become an outreach
of Mt Eden Prison was when the building manager spotted an unknown man
entering the building escorted by two uniformed Chubb security guards and
followed closely by policemen.

A day or so later, another tenant spotted Chubb guards installing an
electronic monitoring device in the ground-floor gym.

She knew nothing of the new tenant and asked what was going on.

I can't name the building or its whereabouts, or name any of the tenants,
because the good judges decided to suppress this information.

But I can say it houses more than 200 residents, many of whom are worried
and angry.

Among them are many of Asian background.

Justice Morris' comment during his pre-Easter ruling has not helped.

He said: "I find it hard to imagine a group of Chinese descending on a flat
in Auckland and absconding. Even the French couldn't do that with the
Rainbow Warrior."

"He was totally out of line," says the resident.

"In fact, the French did blow the Rainbow Warrior up. They sank it and
killed someone. They did succeed."

She is one who has stopped using the street-front gym. She dislikes having
to exercise in front of the prisoner's guards.

"And what if his mates come and try to hijack it. I feel really abused."

The body corporate chairman says gym use has plummeted since Wong's arrival.

So what to do? Some residents are pushing for direct action.

They want to rip out the unauthorised gym monitoring box and leave it to
police and Chubb, the private monitoring agent, to take the next step.

Another course of action is through the civil courts.

The residents point to three rule "breaches" in particular.

Rule 7a forbids the use of a unit for any purpose that "may be injurious to
the reputation" of the building or its owners "or which may interfere with
the peaceful enjoyment of another unit ..."

Then there is 7d, which forbids the use of common property in a manner that
unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of other owners.

Finally, rule 13 forbids any use that may "cause or increase the risk of
fire or explosion" in a unit.

The residents say that if Wong is half as bad as he is made out to be, who
knows what lengths his rescuers, or his enemies, might go to.

The body corporate's lawyer says as a civil lawyer he finds it "rather
incredible nobody ever thought to consult the rules or the wishes of the
majority of proprietors."

The problem with civil courts is that the process may drag on until after
the extradition hearing starts mid-year.

The other possibility is for the body corporate to go to the High Court and
ask for a variation of bail conditions.

Residents are now deciding which course of action will best send Wong on
his way.