Published 17:45 IST, September 22nd 2020
Hong Kong security law makes future of foreign judges 'uncertain': Report
The future of foreign judges serving in Hong Kong has become uncertain after the resignation of veteran Australian judge James Spigelman, said an SCMP columnist
Advertisement
future of foreign judges serving in Hong Kong has become uncertain after resignation of veteran Australian judge James Spigelman, according to a South China Morning Post columnist. China’s draconian national security law has caused major concern for countries providing resources to enforce guarantees provided by Basic Law, de facto constitution enacted to implement Si-British Joint Declaration.
Columnist Alex Lo wrote for Hong Kong-based English daily that days of foreign judges serving in city’s top court may be numbered as ir own governments are questioning viability. Journalists and lawyers have alrey been scrambling to apt to vague and bro definition of offences under national security law and an independent judiciary could be next victim of controversial legislation.
Advertisement
“Whatever preferences or good arguments we have for retaining foreign judges, ir future in Hong Kong looks uncertain,” wrote Alex.
Advertisement
Concerns over law
Spigelman resigned from court two years ahe of schedule, explicitly citing national security law as reason behind his decision. Australia, Britain, New Zealand and Cana currently provide n-permanent judges for Court of Final Appeal. president of British Supreme Court in London has alrey hinted that UK judges might t serve in Hong Kong if city’s judicial independence gets compromised by new law.
Advertisement
“That would suit leftists as well as some pro-establishment figures fine. y have long wanted a completely local Chinese judiciary,” Alex ded.
Earlier this month, China h rebuked United Nations experts who raised serious objections over draconian national security law imposed on Hong Kong which undermined city’s automy. In a letter to Chinese government, UN special rapporteurs on human rights warned that parts of legislation which define organising, planning, committing or participating in secession or subversion, “appear to criminalise speech acts, including political writing.”
Advertisement
Advertisement
(With ANI inputs)
17:45 IST, September 22nd 2020