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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll