The NPC Standing Committee cannot 'rewrite history' with its controversial reinterpretation of right of abode laws, the Court of Final Appeal was told yesterday.
Denis Chang SC, for 17 migrants in a landmark case, launched the first attack on the validity of Beijing's decision to be heard by the court.
He argued that the National People's Congress Standing Committee could not exercise its power of interpretation in relation to Hong Kong cases unless asked to by the Court of Final Appeal.
'Although the power of interpretation is vested in or . . . belongs to the Standing Committee, the exercise of that power is regulated by the mechanisms contained in Article 158 of the Basic Law,' he told the court.
It was unconstitutional to backdate the effect of the reinterpretation to July 1, 1997, he argued.
The case raised the 'absurd' prospect of the court asking the Standing Committee to consider whether the committee had itself acted lawfully when it made the interpretation.
This, Mr Chang said, created 'a loop'. He argued that even if the reinterpretation was held to be lawful and could be backdated, it should not be used to reinstate removal orders which were made unfairly.