Court of Final Appeal judge Kemal Bokhary says he hopes there will never be another reinterpretation of the Basic Law by Beijing.
Mr Justice Bokhary, known for his strong independent views, also said in an interview in the Hong Kong Lawyer journal although he did not feel the independence of the Judiciary had been compromised by the June 1999 reinterpretation, judicial autonomy was another question.
He was referring to the reinterpretation of the Basic Law by the National People's Congress Standing Committee on the abode issue. It effectively overruled a Court of Final Appeal decision which had granted abode to the mainland children of SAR residents.
Mr Justice Bokhary's comments come after non-permanent Court of Final Appeal judge Mr Justice Anthony Mason wrote in an Australian academic paper there were no checks and balances on the powers of the NPC Standing Committee, an arrangement that was 'fraught with questions'.
Mr Bokhary said: 'I wouldn't analyse [the reinterpretation] in terms of judicial independence. Perhaps the analysis should be made in terms of judicial autonomy. But in any event there have been no further interpretations, and hopefully there will never be another one.'
On his dissenting opinion in recent right-of-abode judgments, Mr Justice Bokhary denied there was any 'pervasive philosophical difference' between himself and the other judges.