header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
29 July 2020 / Dr Ping-fat Sze
Issue: 7897 / Categories: Features , Profession , International justice
printer mail-detail

What future for Hong Kong?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
25158
Dr Ping-fat Sze reflects on the recently introduced national security law & the administration of justice in Hong Kong

On the eve of the 23rd anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong to China, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC) in Beijing shocked the world by promulgating a national security law for this former British colony, criminalising any act of secession, subversion, terrorism or collusion with foreign or external forces.

Its provisions, which were kept secret until after it had been passed (incidentally, without any prior consultation in Hong Kong), were widely, if not also vaguely phrased.

This law takes precedence over both the Basic Law and the other law of Hong Kong. Its administration falls within the jurisdiction of a national security commission chaired by the chief executive of Hong Kong, who is to act on the advice of a security official from Beijing. The commission is vested with very wide powers, including the selection of judges to hear cases brought under this

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll