header-logo header-logo

Hong Kong’s anti-mask law: what next?

23 January 2020 / Dr Ping-fat Sze
Issue: 7871 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail
14636
Dr Ping-fat Sze comments on the Hong Kong court’s compromise on the criminalisation of protest & shares his concerns about the rule of law & the future of justice

The administration of justice in Hong Kong has again hit the international headlines at the end of 2019 with the High Court suspending its earlier decision that the anti-mask law made by the Chief Executive in Council was unconstitutional and thus inoperative.

Anti-mask law

With the persistent street demonstrations, the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation was made on 4 October 2019, pursuant to the Emergency Regulations Ordinance 1922. It created a criminal offence, punishable by a fine or imprisonment, for any person wearing a mask in public assemblies (other than for medical, religious or occupational purposes) or refusing to remove it on demand. These provisions were said to be necessary for effective law enforcement.

Upon judicial review, however, this regulation (absent the sanction of the Legislative Council) was held incompatible with the Basic Law. The measures were also deemed unnecessary

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll