Does Hong Kong’s government hold power over the legislative and judicial branches? Justice department’s court appeal on anti-mask law suggests so

Argument submitted to Court of Appeal suggests administration can make decisions with implications on judicial oversight and legislation

Mask ban set up to quell protests was earlier ruled unconstitutional by High Court, prompting appeal by government

4-MIN READ4-MIN

Anti-government protesters with Guy Fawkes masks in Tsim Sha Tsui. Photo: Felix Wong

Published: 9:56pm, 28 Nov 2019Updated: 1:08am, 29 Nov 2019

Hong Kong’s justice department has told the courts that the city has always been “executive-led” on constitutional matters instead of being governed by the principle of a pure separation of powers, fuelling an ongoing legal debate over the validity of the anti-mask law.

The argument, presented in a 30-page paper by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and submitted to the Court of Appeal, suggested the administration had more power than commonly thought, with implications on judicial oversight and legislation.

The High Court had previously found the ban on masks – which was introduced to quell the anti-government movement roiling the city – unconstitutional, ruling that the chief executive had displaced the power of the legislature by invoking an emergency law.

The government then brought the case to the Court of Appeal in a bid to reinstate the ban, arguing the lower court should allow the executive branch a broader discretion over emergency laws.

The Department of Justice on Lower Albert Road in Central. Photo: Nora Tam

The court then suspended the pronouncement of unconstitutionality by the High Court until December 10, pending the substantive appeal by the government.