My Take | Landmark judgment is a positive sign amid the gloom
- The ruling in a protest case demonstrates the continued willingness of judges to apply the law as they see it, using tried and tested common law principles
Hong Kong’s legal system has been engulfed by controversy in recent times as the courts apply a new national security law and decide multiple cases arising from civil unrest in 2019. These are challenging times.
But anyone looking for positive signs amid the gloom should read the Court of Final Appeal’s landmark judgment in a protest case on Friday. This long, technical ruling, with Latin phrases and arcane terminology, is a classic example of the city’s traditional common law approach.
The unanimous judgment is significant. It restricts the scope of an offence frequently used to target those present at scenes of unrest. Importance was attached to the wording of the law, a key feature of the city’s system. Limits were imposed on the ability of the courts to broaden laws to reflect changes in society. The ruling also revealed how mistakes in the Chinese translation of English laws can lead judges astray.
Much of this will, no doubt, be overlooked, amid the city’s political divisions. For many, only the result will matter. The court cleared property agent Chan Chun-kit, who had been jailed for 5½ months for carrying 48 zip ties with criminal intent at an anti-government protest in 2019.
Chan was present at an unauthorised assembly. He was dressed in black, the uniform of the protests. Police found him with a respirator and knuckle gloves as well as the bag of six-inch plastic ties. There was reason to suspect he was up to no good.
Zip ties had frequently been used by participants in the social unrest. A magistrate decided Chan intended to use them to build barricades to be deployed in armed confrontations or to block roads.