National security law: what does the UK withdrawal of judges from Hong Kong’s top court show about respect given to city’s judiciary and government?
- Departing judges’ statement shows continued confidence in city’s judiciary, source says, adding that the move would have minimal impact on court operations
- Some observers say the exits are ‘respectable’, ‘long overdue’, while others worry about ‘knock-on effect’ on remaining overseas judges in Court of Final Appeal
While supporters and detractors argue over Britain’s justification for withdrawing its last two judges from Hong Kong’s top court, legal experts and political commentators appear to agree on one issue – the city’s judicial system is still respected and seen in a separate light from the government.
The vote of confidence in that respect was spelled out in Wednesday’s statement by UK Supreme Court president Lord Robert Reed in announcing that he and vice-president Lord Patrick Hodge had resigned from serving in Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal.
In his resignation statement, Reed first praised the Hong Kong’s courts’ commitment to the rule of law, before moving on to say that having consulted the UK administration, they had decided they could not appear to endorse the Hong Kong government, which they accused of depriving people of freedom of expression.
Among those who acknowledged Reed’s recognition was the city’s first chief justice after Hong Kong’s transfer of sovereignty to mainland China, Andrew Li Kwok-nang.
“A significant part of Lord Reed’s announcement is his recognition that ‘The courts in Hong Kong continue to be internationally respected for their commitment to the rule of law,” he said, in a statement to the Post.