header-logo header-logo

29 July 2020 / Dr Ping-fat Sze
Issue: 7897 / Categories: Features , Profession , International justice
printer mail-detail

What future for Hong Kong?

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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll