Advertisement
Advertisement
Hong Kong national security law (NSL)
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
The UK has withdrawn its judges from Hong Kong’s top court. Photo: Sam Tsang

National security law: Hong Kong, Beijing condemn British judicial body’s withdrawal of judges from city’s top court

  • UK Supreme Court President Lord Robert Reed, Vice-President Lord Patrick Hodge resign from Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal with immediate effect
  • British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab express support for decision, criticise ‘erosion of liberty and democracy in Hong Kong’

Britain’s top judicial body has withdrawn its last two serving judges from Hong Kong’s highest court, citing concerns over national security legislation imposed by Beijing and ending a long-standing arrangement that stood as a strong endorsement of the city’s rule of law.

In a statement published on Wednesday, UK Supreme Court president Lord Robert Reed said he had submitted his resignation together with vice-president Lord Patrick Hodge to the Hong Kong government with immediate effect – a move that defenders of the city’s judicial independence condemned as politically rather than professionally driven.

The pair were previously among eight British judges serving in Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal. Six of the other appointees are retired and will not be affected by the withdrawal, with non-permanent judge Lord Jonathan Sumption having previously stated that he would stay on.

Four other judges from Australia and Canada also currently serve in the city’s top court.

UK Supreme Court President Lord Robert Reed (right) has resigned from Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal, together with Vice-President Lord Patrick Hodge. Photo: Handout

Hong Kong government officials and top legal bodies have decried the British move as putting politics before the law, while also stressing the impact would be minimal.

“We have no choice but acquiesced in the two eminent judges’ decision to resign from the Court of Final Appeal following the UK government’s decision to discontinue an agreement that has been respected and has served both the Hong Kong and UK interests well for years,” Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor said.

“But we must vehemently refute any unfounded allegations that the judges’ resignations have anything to do with the introduction of the Hong Kong national security law or the exercise of freedom of speech and political freedom in Hong Kong.”

The government issued a separate statement against Britain’s “unfounded allegations”.

UK judges’ exit: Hong Kong judicial independence will be upheld

“The fact that there would be a debate in the UK Parliament may well have influenced the resignation of the two serving UK judges,” the statement read.

“This is clear evidence of external political pressure on judges of an otherwise independent judiciary. This will not be tolerated and will not happen in Hong Kong.”

China’s foreign ministry commissioner’s office in Hong Kong also issued a statement against Britain, saying: “This reflects their evil intentions of disrupting the rule of law in Hong Kong.”

Chief Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung said the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the rule of law would be “wholly unaffected by the departure of the two judges”.

01:20

China condemns Britain’s ‘unfounded allegations’ against Hong Kong’s national security law

China condemns Britain’s ‘unfounded allegations’ against Hong Kong’s national security law

The UK Supreme Court’s move came in step with the British government’s stance, elaborated in a joint statement by Foreign Secretary Liz Truss and Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab.

“We have seen a systematic erosion of liberty and democracy in Hong Kong. Since the national security law was imposed, authorities have cracked down on free speech, the free press and free association,” Truss said.

“The situation has reached a tipping point where it is no longer tenable for British judges to sit on Hong Kong’s leading court, and would risk legitimising oppression.”

Raab said the national security law had stripped the city of its freedom of expression, calling it an immense departure from the agreement between London and Beijing as part of Hong Kong’s handover in 1997.

“We regretfully agree that it is no longer appropriate for serving UK judges to continue sitting in Hong Kong courts,” Raab said, adding the move had followed a lengthy discussion with the UK Supreme Court.

British ex-top judge to quit Hong Kong’s highest court over security law

The joint statement by the top British officials also cited the prosecutions of both activist media tycoon Jimmy Lai Chee-ying and 47 opposition figures as the basis for their decision.

Despite submitting his resignation, Reed said Hong Kong’s legal system would continue to be internationally respected for its commitment to the rule of law.

“Nevertheless, I have concluded, in agreement with the government, that the judges of the Supreme Court cannot continue to sit in Hong Kong without appearing to endorse an administration which has departed from values of political freedom, and freedom of expression, to which the justices of the Supreme Court are deeply committed,” he said.

The decision came just months after the UK government labelled the rule of law in Hong Kong as “finely balanced” in its latest six-monthly report on the city, which had previously refrained from criticising the local judicial system.

The British government has supported the departure of two of the country’s top judges from Hong Kong’s highest judicial body, citing the impact of the national security law on the city’s “liberty and democracy”. Photo: Sam Tsang

Since the city’s handover, the top court has appointed judges from other common law jurisdictions, including Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, to preside over its hearings as an acknowledgement that Hong Kong’s rule of law has remained intact.

Writing in her official blog on Wednesday, Hong Kong Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng Yeuk-wah hit back yet again at “unfair criticisms” of the legislation banning acts of succession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces, and insisted the rule of law would remain strong.

“The constitutional bedrock upon which our judicial independence is premised will not be shaken. With a strong, robust and professional legal fraternity, our judicial system will continue to remain intact and robust,” she said.

The Hong Kong Bar Association expressed “deep regret” at the British move, with chairman Victor Dawes noting the forceful calls faced by UK judges from politicians to pull out, and stressing that it could not see “any justified concern” of the rule of law being undermined in the city.

Ex-Bar Association chairman leaves Hong Kong for UK after meeting with police

“Their decision to resign is regrettable but we are confident that our highest court will continue to provide the high standards of justice to which Hong Kong has become accustomed,” he said.

Hong Kong Law Society President Chan Chak-ming also called the judges’ departure “a matter of deep regret”, adding that it “disappointingly falls short of” the wide support for the current arrangement among the public and legal professionals.

“I sincerely appeal to the UK judges to reverse course and all overseas non-permanent judges to continue to sit in the Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong to make their significant continual contributions to serve the cause of justice for the interests of Hong Kong people,” he said.

Former chief executive Leung Chun-ying condemned the withdrawal of the judges as an act of British government interference with the city’s judiciary using administrative means.

“This will go down as a permanent stain of Britain’s judicial independence, bankruptcy of its principle of separation of power and a laughing stock of the world,” said Leung, who is also a vice-chairman of China’s top political advisory body.

Last year, Baroness Brenda Hale stepped down from the court. Although she denied that the National Security Law influenced her decision, she said it had cast uncertainties on “protests and civil liberties and the likes”. Photo: Handout

Senior counsel Ronny Tong Ka-wah, who is a member of the government’s top advisory body, the Executive Council, “strongly condemned” British lawmakers for politicising the issue.

“It is regrettable that the UK judges had failed to withstand such pressure,” said Tong, a former chairman of the Bar Association.

British consul general Brian Davidson said his diplomatic office would continue to support Hong Kong people and the principles of freedom and democracy as stipulated in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984 to guarantee the city’s way of life.

“We will continue to raise our concerns directly with both the Hong Kong and Chinese authorities when this is not respected,” he said.

Last year, Baroness Brenda Hale, then president of the British Supreme Court, asked the city’s judiciary not to renew her contract, citing logistical reasons.

Hong Kong pair accused of training pro-independence ‘warriors’

Despite denying any connection between the national security law and her decision to quit, Hale said the law had cast uncertainties on “protests and civil liberties and the likes”.

Hale said last June the “jury is still out” on how Hong Kong would operate under the Beijing-imposed law, but had added she believed it would not affect the city’s commercial life.

Australian Judge James Spigelman also decided to resign from the city’s top court in September 2020, two years before the end of his tenure and several months after the national security law was enacted.

Spigelman had told Australia’s national broadcaster that he had resigned for reasons “related to the content of the national security legislation”, but offered no further explanation for his decision.

351