An independent committee investigating the deadly Tai Po fire in Hong Kong has identified a series of failures contributing to the disaster that claimed 168 lives last November. The committee’s lead counsel, Victor Dawes, described a combination of reckless contractors and systemic regulatory weaknesses as critical factors in the tragedy that also left thousands homeless.

The fire, which engulfed seven of the eight towers in the Wang Fuk Court complex, was deemed both foreseeable and preventable but not adequately addressed. Dawes emphasized the need for immediate remedial actions and clearer allocation of responsibility following months of public hearings that included testimonies from victims, experts, and officials.

Authorities have focused much of their attention on unscrupulous renovation contractors whose use of flammable polystyrene boards and inadequate fire safety measures reportedly accelerated the blaze. Dawes noted wooden boards placed over windows contributed to smoke filling escape routes and suggested the fire likely started from a lit cigarette butt discarded on a rooftop lightwell.

Since the tragedy, law enforcement agencies including the police and the Independent Commission Against Corruption have charged seven individuals and two companies with offenses ranging from regulatory violations to manslaughter. The government has pointed to safety netting around the buildings as substandard, further exacerbating the fire’s spread.

While contractors bore significant blame, the inquiry highlighted “numerous failings” by government departments that allowed fraudulent practices to flourish. Dawes criticized a regulatory environment reliant on an “honour system” that permitted contractors to self-certify compliance without sufficient verification. He also cited pre-announced inspections and inadequate responses to residents’ complaints as enabling deception and poor oversight.

The committee’s findings will be reviewed by Justice David Lok, who leads the investigation panel, which is expected to submit a detailed report with recommendations later this year. However, the body does not possess authority to assign criminal or legal responsibility beyond its advisory role.

Calls for stronger accountability have intensified, with some experts noting that the government’s limited statutory powers given to the inquiry have hindered transparency and action. John Burns, emeritus professor at the University of Hong Kong, observed that Beijing’s cautious stance following the 2019 pro-democracy protests likely influenced the inquiry’s scope, reflecting concerns over maintaining control in the city.

The political ramifications of the disaster may affect Chief Executive John Lee’s prospects for re-election next year, with public demand growing for tangible accountability measures.

Government representatives acknowledged shortcomings in regulatory procedures but pushed back against primary culpability claims. Lawyer Jenkin Suen, speaking on behalf of government bureaus, cited recent reforms including removal of pre-announcement for inspections, enhanced interdepartmental coordination, bans on combustible building materials, and stricter inspection protocols.

In a statement, the Hong Kong government confirmed it had banned smoking at construction sites and was reviewing relevant renovation and bidding regulations. It reiterated that accountability would be pursued based on factual findings and evidence disclosed in the inquiry.