Higher HK courts tend to rule against government: study
Higher courts in Hong Kong have ruled more often against the government in cases involving the Basic Law than lower ones, according to the first study on the subject by a central government think tank.
The study by the State Council's Hong Kong and Macau Research Institute found that, while the Court of Final Appeal ruled in favour of applicants in half the cases it concluded, the Court of First Instance did so in only a quarter of cases and the Court of Appeal in a third. The government was never an applicant in any of the cases reviewed.
Now the researchers are looking for reasons for the discrepancy, which they say does not occur in major jurisdictions such as the United States, Britain and France.
'We will study why the difference occurs. We will look into the judges' background and see whether we can find some clues,' said Simon Lee Hoey, a visiting fellow at Tsinghua University's School of Law, and researcher for the study.
Legal experts were divided over the survey, but a constitutional law professor said the presence of foreign judges on the highest court - criticised by some mainland figures but defended by the Hong Kong government - could be 'beneficial' for more 'liberal interpretations'.
The research was published in the spring issue of the institute's journal, Hong Kong and Macau Studies. It has not been formally released in Hong Kong. Reports of the institute's studies will be sent to state leaders and the departments responsible for Hong Kong affairs.