Subject to interpretation: charting the history of Hong Kong’s Basic Law
As Beijing gets set to interpret Article 104 over the oath-taking controversy, we look back at how the Basic Law came into being, and the challenges which have arisen
The Basic Law has been in place for fewer than two decades, yet the Oaths and Declarations Ordinance, the local legal instrument to implement the Basic Law provision which requires lawmakers to swear to uphold the Basic Law and swear allegiance to Hong Kong as part of the People’s Republic of China, has a much longer history.
The ordinance, passed in 1972, can be traced to the Promissory Oaths Ordinance enacted in 1869. The Oaths and Declaration Ordinance, which is one of the subjects of the judicial review sought by the Hong Kong government in a bid to bar the two Youngspiration legislators from taking their seats, spells out the arrangements for oath-taking by top officials and lawmakers, as well as the consequences of failing to comply with the law.
The ordinance states that any person “who declines or neglects to take an oath duly requested” shall vacate or be disqualified from office. It also stipulated that if a lawmaker takes his or her oath at the first sitting of a Legco session, it shall be administered by the Clerk to the Legco, who is the secretary general of the legislature. The Legco president shall administer the oath-taking if it is taken at a subsequent meeting.