Cliff Buddle

Opinion | Court ruling on Hong Kong police complaints system highlights judicial independence

Hong Kong’s judiciary should not be afraid of reform to modernise the courts, but any attempt to erode judicial independence or reduce judicial power would be devastating

Reading Time:4 minutes

Why you can trust SCMP

Cliff Buddle

Published: 8:30am, 26 Nov 2020Updated: 8:30am, 26 Nov 2020

A dramatic court ruling last week declaring Hong Kong’s system for complaints against the police to be ineffective and unlawful could not have come at a better time.

The damning judgment on a system in which the government placed so much faith during months of civil unrest last year was delivered only two days after Beijing made a high-profile call for judicial reform. It served as a reminder that the courts in Hong Kong decide cases independently, even if they concern matters of great political sensitivity.

Beijing’s support for judicial reform raises concern that steps will be taken to make the judiciary more compliant and likely to favour the government.

Zhang Xiaoming, deputy director of the State Council’s Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, described reform of the judicial system as a hot topic in the community at a legal forum to mark the 30th anniversary of the Basic Law’s promulgation. He did not explain why reform was necessary or provide details of the changes Beijing has in mind. Zhang did, however, provide a clue by citing the views of former Court of Final Appeal judge Henry Litton.

Litton, who served with the judiciary for more than 20 years, has campaigned against what he perceives to be its failings since retiring in 2015. He has accused the judges of becoming detached from the community, turning courts into debating chambers to attack government policies and losing the trust of Beijing.

03:18

Hong Kong’s national security law is like ‘anti-virus software’, top Beijing official says

As a distinguished member of the legal community, his views deserve attention and few would disagree with Litton’s call for focused judgments and judicial rigour. But he has, in the process, become a poster boy for members of the pro-establishment camp eager to clip the judiciary’s wings.