Advertisement
Hong Kong protests
OpinionLetters

Letters | Jimmy Lai case and British QC: UK critics fail the test on rule of law

Reading Time:2 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
3
David Perry QC at the High Court in Hong Kong in 2018. Perry has tackled a raft of high-profile cases in the city, including the 2017 misconduct trial of former chief executive Donald Tsang and the notorious “milkshake murder”’ of 2003. Photo: Dickson Lee
Letters
Was it an act of open intervention in Hong Kong’s rule of law when British foreign minister Dominic Raab said Queen’s Counsel David Perry was a “mercenary” for agreeing to lead the prosecution of Jimmy Lai Chee-ying and eight others for the Department of Justice? Perry eventually gave up the job under enormous pressure.

Britain is regarded as the cradle of common law but, rather than uphold the integrity of the common law system, Raab has sullied it. Britons appear to cherish the system and to be proud of it, but the actions of the current government cast doubt on that.

Raab even said he could not understand how anyone of “good conscience” in the British legal profession could take the job. By that logic, does it mean that barristers who defend accused criminals such as murderers in court have no conscience?

The West is always quick to criticise the legal system of China, but can fail to meet its own standards.

The cab-rank rule is the obligation of barristers to accept any work in a field in which they profess themselves competent to practise. Under common law, both the prosecution and the defence deserve competent legal representation. Is the common law system in the UK then just a facade, without substance?

I wonder if, in his defence of the system, Raab was playing for political gain in yet another example of political hypocrisy – politics is always in command!

Advertisement