Explainer | What you need to know about Hong Kong’s request for Beijing to interpret national security law amid Jimmy Lai trial

Hong Kong’s top court on Monday ruled a prominent British barrister could defend media tycoon Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, immediately triggering yet another political storm as the city’s leader asked Beijing to intervene.

Hours after the Court of Final Appeal’s ruling, Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu said he had asked the National People’s Congress (NPC) Standing Committee for an interpretation of the national security law to decide whether lawyers who did not practise generally in Hong Kong should be allowed to argue these cases.

Here is what you need to know about the possible interpretation of the national security law, which Beijing imposed on Hong Kong in 2020, and what implications it has for the city’s legal system.

1. What is the dispute about?

The legal tussle was triggered by the Department of Justice after Lai, the 74-year-old founder of the now-defunct Apple Daily who faced charges of collusion with foreign forces, hired British King’s Counsel Timothy Owen to defend him in a trial originally expected to start on Thursday.

The government took the case to the Court of Final Appeal after losing its bid to block Owen from the trial in the lower courts, arguing the admission of overseas counsel in cases involving national security was “incompatible with the overall objective and design” of the legislation.

City leader Lee decided to ask the NPC Standing Committee to interpret the national security law after the top court upheld its decision to allow Owen to defend Lai. His move was backed by Beijing’s officials overseeing the city’s affairs, who said the court decision had violated “the legislative spirit and legal logic” of the national security law.

On Tuesday, Secretary for Justice Paul Lam Ting-kwok requested the court adjourn Lai’s case as the city awaited Beijing’s ruling.