The Wang Fuk Court tragedy has inflicted one of the deepest scars Hong Kong has endured in decades, leaving a community in mourning and a wider city seeking answers and reassurance. The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government’s swift decision to establish an independent, judge-led committee to review the fire is both timely and vital, signaling that a disaster of this scale requires a transparent process to begin restoring public confidence.
The fire burned for nearly two days, devastating the local community, resulting in 160 fatalities, 79 injuries, and leaving some people unaccounted for. Initial media reports focused on external renovations, including highly flammable plastic-foam boards, protective netting, and bamboo scaffolding, which contributed to the fire’s spread. To date, 15 people have been arrested on suspicion of manslaughter in connection with the case.
Appointing a judge to oversee the independent review highlights one of Hong Kong’s key strengths under “one country, two systems”: a common-law judiciary that is globally respected for its independence, fairness, and rigorous approach to evidence. Having a judge lead the process gives the inquiry the authority to examine decisions made by private contractors, government bodies, and regulators, and the public confidence needed for its findings to carry real weight. This committee differs from other investigations carried out by the Hong Kong Police Force, the Fire Services Department, and the Independent Commission Against Corruption.
According to official statements, the review will examine the systems for planning, executing, supervising, and regulating building works, including safety requirements; tendering and supervision arrangements; the regulatory responsibilities of government departments and professionals; and the adequacy of existing legislation, penalties, and technical standards for construction and fire safety.
Such a broad mandate is essential because, in significant incidents of this kind, the eventual loss of life often results not from a series of weaknesses across design, materials, approval and oversight processes, day-to-day management, and emergency preparedness, but from a combination of factors involving multiple actors and systems.
Throughout the inquiry, the human impact must remain at the center of the process. The experiences of survivors and families who lost loved ones are vital for understanding what worked, what failed, and how the response unfolded. They will require clear communication and genuine support — legal, emotional, and practical — to participate in a process that will be demanding and distressing
Lessons can also be learned from the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire in London. The public inquiry, published seven years later, revealed serious flaws in building safety regulations, including the use of combustible cladding, and gaps and overlaps in regulatory oversight.
The post-Grenfell experience clearly warns about the cost of slow reform. Despite a widespread overhaul of UK building safety laws, progress remains inconsistent: Regulatory bodies are still stretched, approval procedures face delays, and tens of thousands of residents continue to live in buildings with unsafe cladding or unresolved defects eight years later.
The inquiry’s final reports clarified that the Grenfell fire was not caused by a single mistake but by decades of delay, half-measures, and unwillingness to challenge industry practices that prioritize cost over safety. The broader lesson is clear: In high-risk systems, whether in regulation, product approval, or emergency planning, failing to act promptly on known hazards becomes a form of systemic negligence, leaving dangers in place until disaster compels change.
The Hong Kong SAR government has already made clear that the Wang Fuk Court committee must adhere to a strict timetable and deliver early recommendations on the most urgent issues. At the same time, it has begun conducting citywide inspections and implementing risk-reduction measures focused on scaffolding, facade work, and fire safety systems to address immediate hazards.
The committee also has an opportunity to address deeper, long-standing problems in Hong Kong’s building management and construction sectors that have come into sharper focus in recent years. Investigations by the ICAC and the Competition Commission have revealed worrying patterns in the maintenance and renovation market, particularly in older estates. Their findings point to instances of bid-rigging and other forms of collusion that distort competition and undermine effective oversight.
The Competition Commission is currently investigating two groups suspected of price fixing across 25 projects worth more than HK$600 million ($77.1 million), building on earlier joint operations with the ICAC. These practices drive up costs, put safety at risk and allow substandard work to slip through when contracts are shared among familiar players rather than awarded through open competition.
In the meantime, Hong Kong has also been working to enhance procurement regulations, tighten contractor screening, and provide better support to owners’ corporations, all of which demonstrate a commitment to long-term safety. However, the committee should utilize the expertise of both the ICAC and the Competition Commission to formulate reforms that combat corruption, safeguard reputable firms, and rebuild public trust. These measures naturally align with the broader effort to modernize regulation and refurbish the city’s aging building stock.
Throughout the inquiry, the human impact must remain at the center of the process. The experiences of survivors and families who lost loved ones are vital for understanding what worked, what failed, and how the response unfolded. They will require clear communication and genuine support — legal, emotional, and practical — to participate in a process that will be demanding and distressing. Their involvement, whether regarding alarms, escape routes, communication during the fire, or the assistance they received afterward, will ensure the inquiry stays rooted in lived experience and avoids becoming a purely technical exercise.
Ultimately, the value of the independent committee will be judged by the tangible improvements it achieves — such as how external works are approved, how building contracts are supervised, how regulators coordinate, and how victims and their families are supported in the long term. What matters is whether the inquiry results in safer practices on the ground, clearer responsibilities, and a regulatory culture that does not wait for another tragedy before taking action.
The government has taken an important step by establishing an independent, judge-led review, indicating its commitment to broader systemic reform. The committee must work diligently, transparently, and with a sincere focus on survivors’ needs, ensuring their experiences influence both the findings and the solutions. Despite the profound loss, the legacy of the Wang Fuk Court tragedy can help foster a safer, more-trustworthy environment in Hong Kong and offer lessons of enduring value beyond the city.
The author is an international partner and member of the Global Advisory Board, MilleniumAssociates AG.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
