. P 235E. . It therefore follows that where open administration of justice in a case would frustrate that ultimate aim of doing justice, it is a most important if not decisive consideration to take into account when balancing the relevant interests, rights andfreedoms involved’ to decide whether open justice should be restricted, and if so, by what means and to what extent. 27. The case law has very often expressed this in terms of a requirement of " necessity" , that is, where justice would be frustrated if open administration of justice in a particular case is not restricted, then, to the extent necessary to prevent that from happening, there may be restriction on doins justice openly. 28. This requirement of "necessity “ is founded on the common law, and has also found expression in article 10 of the Hong Kong Bill ofRights and, in the case of the Court ofFinal Appeal, section 47(3) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance. Article 10 of the Hong Kong Bill ofRights relevantly provides that the press and public may be excluded from a hearing " to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests ofjustice 29. Obvious examples here include proceedings involving wards of court or mentally incapacitated persons. Another example is proceedings for the protection of secret process. Scott v Scott, at p 437. . 18