Extracted Replay to RSW's Enquiries

The Board has recently received enquiries from RSWs seeking
clarification on the interpretation of section 35 of the Social Workers
Registration Ordinance and the interpretation of the Judgement handed
down by Mr. Justice Stone on the judicial review sought by en ex-social
worker. After seeking legal advice, the Board has issued a reply which
is extracted hereunder for general information:-

Interpretation of the Ordinance

1. Under section 35 of the Ordinance,
   "Any person who-
   ...

(h) hot being a registered social worker...knowingly permits the
use of, or uses, in connection with his business or profession.
(i) the description "registered social worker" or "註冊社會工作者"
(ii) the initials "R.S.W."
(iii) the description "social work" or "社會工作" or "social work"
or 社會工作者 or "社工",
(iv) any initials or abbreviation of words intended to cause, or which
may reasonably cause, any person to believe that the person using
the initials or abbreviations, as the case may be, is on the Register,
(i) not being on the Register, advertises or represents himself as a registered
social worker or knowingly permits himself to be so advertised or represented;
...
commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine at level 5..."

2. According to the afore quoted section of the Ordinance, a person who is not
   registered under the Ordinance but nevertheless describes himself as a
   "registered social worker", or "social worker", or use the description of
   "social work", or permits the use of these terms with his rank title, is liable
   to be prosecuted.
   
   
3. A non registered person practicing social work or occupying the post of a social
   worker would have, if not directly used, permitted the use of the term "social work",
   or even "registered social worker" in his rank title in the course of his job,
   and therefore might trigger section 35 of the Ordinance.
   
   
4. The Board is fully aware that aware that any use of the terms "social work"
   or "social worker" etc. will not constitute an offence under the Ordinance if
   such use is within sections 34(3) and (4) of the Ordinance, i.e. using the
   terms "social work" etc. to describe his academic qualification or past working
   experience (as envisaged by section 34(3) and (4) of the Ordinance).
   However, such exceptions will not apply to the situation which a person actually
   practices social work by engaging a social worker's post.
   
   
5. The Board is also fully aware that it is not a statutory requirement for person
   to any person to register under the Ordinance provided always that such person
   does not describe himself or permit himself if to be described in connection with
   the terms "social work", "social worker" etc.
   
   
   Interpretation of the Judgment delivered by Mr. Justice Stone
   
   
   
6. The Board appreciates that Mr. Justice Stone has clarified that the
   Ordinance dose not impose a statutory requirement for all social
   workers to register. The Bored also notes that Mr. Justice Stone has
   clarified how an unregistered social worker could be held liable of
   a criminal offence under the Ordinance.:-
   
   "...it is plain on a fair reading of the sequence of correspondence
   that the criminal aspect which was principally arousing concern lay
   not in failure to register per se but in the event that social workers
   in the relevant grades continued to use their rank titles in the course
   of their jobs absent such registration" (page 19)
   
   
   
7. It is under such circumstances that a social worker who fails to register
   or fails to renew his registration status whilst practicing social work
   and occupying social work post may trigger section 35 under the Ordinance.