Hong Kong waiter Ricky Chan strikes again, targeting same six pan-democrats in new lawsuit
Former chief secretary Anson Chan reprimands government for commencing separate legal proceedings against four legislators
In a claim filed at the High Court on Thursday, restaurant worker Ricky Chan Ka-wai asked for pan-democrats Cheng Chung-tai, Eddie Chu Hoi-dick, Nathan Law Kwun-chung, “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung, Shiu Ka-chun and Dr Edward Yiu Chung-yim to be removed from their Legislative Council seats because they had failed to be sworn in according to Article 104 of the Basic Law and Section 21 of the Oaths and Declarations Ordinance.
The claimant accused Yiu of changing the form as prescribed by inserting extra phrases into the oath. The other five pan-democrats were targeted for adding words or using props when they took their oaths.
Ricky Chan requested that the court issue an injunction restraining the group of six from acting as Legco members.
The waiter also named Legco president Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen as a defendant alongside Legco secretary general Kenneth Chen Wei-on, who had respectively validated the lawmakers’ oaths on October 18 and during the previous week.
On November 29, the waiter nearly halved this number in an amendment to his judicial review application and dropped Raymond Chan Chi-chuen, Dr Fernando Cheung Chiu-hung, Roy Kwong Chung-yu, Lam Cheuk-ting, Andrew Wan Siu-kin and Dr Helena Wong Pik-wan from his list.
Anson Chan, convenor of think-tank Hong Kong 2020, deplored the government’s decision to take legal action against the four legislators.
“It is a blatant attempt on the part of the chief executive and his administration to subvert the outcome of the recent Legco elections and thwart the will of tens of thousands of voters,” Chan said in a statement issued on Friday.
She described the move as a “witch hunt” that would gravely undermine the autonomy of the legislature and the rights of elected members.
“The disqualification of elected Legco members who have been duly sworn in and are undertaking their duties is clearly vindictive, politically motivated and manifestly counter to the general public interest,” she added.
