My Take | Interpretation by Hong Kong pan-democrat makes sense
The words of Johannes Chan regarding rulings by Beijing ring true, it’s to be hoped that those seeking a judicial review on the joint rail checkpoint take note
The first request by the post-handover government for an interpretation of the Basic Law by Beijing in 1999 is often blamed for starting a precedent for mainland judicial interference.
Of the five interpretations so far, two were initiated by Beijing, two by the Hong Kong government and one by the High Court.
What is often forgotten is that the first request was popular because it was an attempt to stop the floodgates being opened for an estimated 1.6 million people from the mainland coming to live in Hong Kong.
Since then, though, it has become an article of faith among most opposition figures that any interpretation by the National People’s Congress Standing Committee undermines, bit by bit, the city’s judicial independence.
This, I gather, is pretty much the assumption behind the safeguards proposed by prominent pan-democrat legal scholar Johannes Chan Man-mun to discourage future interpretations by the Standing Committee.