Beijing’s ‘distortion’ of Hong Kong Basic Law greatly undermines rule of law, legal experts warn

On Wednesday, China’s top legislature – the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC) – approved the plan following a unanimous vote and months of controversy. Hong Kong will effectively surrender its jurisdiction across a quarter of the new West Kowloon terminus, where immigration procedures will be performed by mainland law enforcement agents. Beijing’s “distortion” of the Basic Law in justifying the Express Rail Link’s joint checkpoint arrangement has greatly undermined Hong Kong’s rule of law, legal experts have warned.

Transport chief defends transparency of co-location plan

Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan Fan said the government has been doing its best to make the co-location deal between Hong Kong and mainland China as transparent as possible. He dismissed criticism that the co-location arrangement is a “black box” operation, the Hong Kong Economic Journal reports. Barrister Chris Ng Chung-luen, a spokesperson for the Progressive Lawyers Group, said Hong Kong courts might refuse to accept any challenge against the plan once it is approved and endorsed by the NPCSC, to the detriment of ”one country, two systems”.

人大釋法 FAQs (FAQs regarding the Interpretation by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on 7 November 2016)

What are the NPCSC’s powers of interpretation of the Basic Law? Article 67(4) of the PRC Constitution and Article 158(1) of the Basic Law gives NPCSC has a freestanding and plenary power of interpretation of the Basic Law. This was also confirmed in the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal case of Lau Kong Yung v Director of Immigration (1999) 2 HKCFAR 300. However, this power should be sparingly used. Both the Hong Kong Bar Association and the Law Society of Hong Kong have in the past consistently called on the NPCSC to use this power with great restraint, as this would give rise to concerns about the rule of law and judicial independence.

法政匯思意見書:強烈譴責人大釋法 為政治目的濫用解釋權 (Submissions in relation to the Interpretation by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on 7 November 2016)

On 7 November 2016, the Standing Committee of the National Peoples Congress (“NPCSC”), in purported exercise of its powers under Article 158 of the Basic Law, issued an interpretation in relation to Article 104 of the Basic Law (“the Interpretation”).  2. This is the fifth time the NPCSC has interpreted the Basic Law. In summary, and as further explained below, the Progressive Lawyers Group’s submissions on the Interpretation are set out in this statement.

李飛以官威凌駕法律

法律上,人大常委根本就沒有權去以「831決定」為行政長官產生辦法設下框架。如果當權者真正尊重法治,是不應亦不能把人大常委在其他階段或程序下可運用的權力拿出來混淆視聽,把無權變成有權、把違法變成合法。

As Crunch Time Nears, Hong Kong Democracy Groups Still Won’t ‘Pocket’ Beijing Reform Plan

(Epoch Times) Three days before the end of a public consultation on political reform, Hong Kong pro-democracy groups reaffirm Hongkongers’ resolve to reject a very restrictive Beijing reform package. The Progressive Lawyers Group recently called out the government for publicizing their campaign on radio and television.