Why did Hong Kong’s top court strike down final appeal bid over oath-taking saga?
Three key factors in the judgment explain why disqualified lawmakers ultimately lost their legal bid to win back their seats in the legislature
Hong Kong’s top court last week refused to give the green light to an appeal bid by two former pro-independence lawmakers who lost their seats in the city’s legislature over improper oaths of office.
Yau Wai-ching and Sixtus Baggio Leung Chun-hang, members of localist political party Youngspiration, were unseated last year after the government took them to court over their antics during their swearing-in ceremonies, during which they resorted to derogatory terms to refer to China and displayed a banner reading “Hong Kong is not China”.
Legal action instigated by former Hong Kong leader Leung Chun-ying and Secretary for Justice Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung ensued in the following weeks, which saw the pair disqualified from the Legislative Council by the Court of First Instance.
The pair were found to have “wilfully declined and neglected” their oaths at the ceremony on October 12.
The saga led the Chinese central government in Beijing to step in by issuing an interpretation of Hong Kong’s mini-constitution, the Basic Law, to set the record straight on oath-taking. The interpretation laid out a list of detailed additional requirements for oaths.