8 | Tuesday, February 2, 2021 HONG KONG| EDITION CHINA DAILY COMMENTHK Hong Kong Law Society: People’s denouncement Upholding criminal justice and setting an example

Grenville Cross says by eschewing political posturing, looking after the interests of lawyers, the SAR’s Law Society has shown that it has got its priorities right

n January, after it emerged Secretary for Justice, Teresa Cheng Yeuk- that a British barrister, David wah, was quick to denounce this aŽ ront to Perry QC, had been briefed by the rule of law, the Hong Kong Bar Asso- the Department of Justice to ciation, which has about 1,500 members, held back, which surprised many. After all, prosecute a public order case in Hong Kong residents protest on Monday outside the British Consulate-General in Hong Hong Kong, he was subjected Grenville Cross as Perry had been politically intimidated Kong, condemning the UK for meddling in China’s internal affairs and interfering with to an unprecedented campaign The author is a senior counsel, law after having been admitted by the High Hong Kong’s judicial independence. RAYMOND CHAN / CHINA DAILY of political intimidation in his own coun- professor and criminal justice analyst, Court to prosecute a case in Hong Kong, Itry. This was designed to secure his with- and was previously the director of pub- the association should have been scream- drawal from the case, and it made a mock- lic prosecutions of the Hong Kong SAR. ing from the rooftops, and its silence was ery of traditional British notions of fair deafening. If the association is unwilling play. What compounded the abuse was its The Law Society pointed out to support Perry, the question inevitably orchestration by legal professionals, who, that, under the Basic Law, arises of whether it will lift a fi nger to despite also being politicians, should still protect the overseas judges who sit on the What is the British have known right from wrong. the Department of Justice Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, given The case involves nine defendants, is vested with the control that Raab also has them in his sights. including Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, Martin of criminal prosecutions, On January 20, moreover, when the Lee Chu-ming, and Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, outgoing Bar chairman, Philip Dykes SC, government up to? who are accused of engaging in an unau- free from any interference met the media, he disclosed that the Bar thorized assembly on August 18, 2019. At (Art.63), and that this must Association had released nearly 50 state- the trial, which starts on February 16 in the be respected. By declaring ments during his 3-year tenure, with 20 he British government announced District Court, the prosecution will argue having come in the past year alone. Such last year that it would oŽ er a British that, following an approved meeting in Vic- that it “strongly condemns prodigality, quite clearly, made it all the National Overseas (BNO) visa for toria Park, on August 18, 2019, the defen- any attempt to assert pres- more surprising that the association could BN(O) passport holders and their dants, in defi ance of police objections, not fi nd it in itself to denounce the politi- closeT family members from January 2021. sure to inhibit the proper cal intimidation of a fellow barrister, par- embarked upon an unauthorized march Beijing reacted strongly, and announced that Ho Lok-sang from Causeway Bay to Central. They have functioning of lawyers”, the ticularly as he is well known to the local it would no longer accept the BN(O) passport The author is a senior research fellow at the been jointly charged with two oŽ enses con- Society has said what need- Bar, and was due to appear shortly in the as a travel document. Other countermeasures Pan Sutong Shanghai-Hong Kong Eco- trary to the Public Order Ordinance, one of city’s courts. may also be in the pipeline. nomic Policy Research Institute, Lingnan organizing an unauthorized assembly, and ed to be said, and barristers Instead, however, of leaping to Perry’s One might say that immigration policy is University. the other of participating in it. and solicitors alike will support, Dykes chose to wax lyrical about the prerogative of any sovereign nation. Why As the case is expected to involve com- welcome this strident affir- judicial independence, claiming that it was should Beijing be upset? It is important to Instead of reassuring Beijing plex constitutional and human rights threatened by the National Security Law. point out that ensuring national security and that Hong Kong is ready, issues, Perry was retained, given his exper- mation of lawyers’ indepen- He should, however, have been concen- territorial integrity is also the prerogative of tise in these areas. The defendants them- dence at a critical time. trating on the immediate threat to pros- a sovereign nation. In the Joint Declaration, some people, led by the op- selves have hired some highly experienced ecutorial independence, and which has the UK accepted that China has sovereignty position parties, asked to barristers to represent them, including now resulted in a distinguished barrister over Hong Kong. But the UK billed the move bypass the nominating com- Paul Harris SC, the new chairman of the of Hong Kong Watch’s functionaries, Luke being hounded oŽ a case in which he had to oŽ er a BN(O) pathway to migrate to the Hong Kong Bar Association. Although, Pulford, went completely over the top, accepted instructions. When, moreover, UK as protecting Hong Kong people from mittee and bring in “civic therefore, Perry’s retention was eminently describing Perry’s involvement as “an utter Dykes’ successor, Paul Harris SC, met the the National Security Law. This not only nomination” and “party sensible, there was an immediate reaction disgrace and humiliation for the United media on the following day, by which time disregards China’s need for national security nomination”. Because these against him, led by prominent politicians. Kingdom”, which even Rifkind must have Perry’s withdrawal had been confi rmed, he and territorial integrity, but also deviated On January 16, when interviewed by realized was a grotesque misrepresenta- gleefully slagged oŽ the National Security from what was stated in a memorandum things are not in the Basic Sky News’ Sophy Ridge, the UK Foreign tion. Law and the police force, while ignoring exchanged in December of 1984 that clearly Law Beijing of course could Secretary, Dominic Raab, a lawyer himself, Hard on Rifkind’s heels, nonetheless, Perry’s persecution, the elephant in the stipulated that BN(O) holders would not have chose to malign Perry, in a scurrilous fash- came the parliamentarian Bob Seely, room. Even now, despite the assault on the right of abode in the UK. The “pathway” not agree to that. Thus it is the ion. He accused the distinguished barrister who, in a particularly vile contribution, criminal justice, nothing has been heard is an aŽ ront to China’s sovereignty over Hong “protesters”, not Beijing, who of behaving in “a pretty mercenary way”, announced that “no lawyer who has any from the Bar Association, although not all Kong. have deviated from the Basic and providing the Chinese government sense of moral value or moral worth is yet lost. Surely the UK should know that national with “a public relations coup”. As to the should take this case on”. These, however, On January 27, the Law Society, under security is an important matter to any sover- Law and thus the Sino-British basis of his ugly slur, Raab claimed he were not the objective comments of a con- the indomitable leadership of Melissa eign nation. Readers can examine for them- Joint Declaration. could not understand “how anyone of cerned politician, but the rantings of an Pang Wan-hei, stepped into the breach, selves some facts, and see the absurdity of the good conscience, from the world-leading obsessive China basher. This is the same and provided the clear direction for claim that Beijing breached what was prom- legal profession that we have, would take Bob Seely who, from August 30 to Septem- which the private sector yearned. In its ised in the Sino-British Declaration. upon nomination by a broadly representative a case where they will have to apply the ber 1, 2019, went on an all-expenses paid “Statement in relation to upholding the The Basic Law in force today was promul- nominating committee in accordance with national security legislation at the behest trip, or “freebie”, to Hong Kong, fi nanced independence of the legal profession and gated back in 1990, and its drafting took years democratic procedures.” of the authorities in Beijing, which is by “Stand with Hong Kong”, the viru- the criminal justice system”, the Society of consultation in Hong Kong. In Annex I of Since “the selection of the Chief Executive directly violating, undermining the free- lently anti-police, pro-protester grouping fl agged up the United Nations Basic the Joint Declaration, under “Constitution” are by universal suŽ rage upon nomination by a dom of the people of Hong Kong”. which acts as the alter ego of Hong Kong Principles on the Role of Lawyers (1990). “Establishment of the Hong Kong S.A.R.” and broadly representative nominating committee Although this tirade undoubtedly played Watch. This, moreover, is the very same These principles require governments to “The Basic Law”. We can say therefore that in accordance with democratic procedures” is well in some circles, there was one major Bob Seely who is the vice chairman of the ensure that lawyers “are able to perform the Basic Law is the embodiment of the Sino- an “ultimate aim”, it is clear that the nominat- problem with it. The case that Perry was All-Party Parliamentary Group on Hong all of their professional functions without British Declaration. As long as Beijing abides ing committee can never be dispensed with. to prosecute has nothing whatsoever to Kong, which conducted the now-notorious intimidation, hindrance, harassment or by the Basic Law, it cannot be said to have Although it is commonly acknowledged that do with the National Security Law, as inquiry last year into alleged misconduct improper interference”, that they are able deviated from the Sino-British Declaration. the nominating committee cannot be said even the most elementary fact-checking by the Hong Kong Police Force during the to travel in the discharge of their profes- Article 23 of the Basic Law clearly states to be “broadly representative”, the progres- would have revealed. Quite clearly, Raab social disorder. What purported to be an sional duties, and that they are not subject that the SAR “shall enact laws on its own to sion toward this goal will be gradual and should have exercised due diligence before objective inquiry was exposed as a fraud to threats intended to impair their work. prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, will be “in the light of the actual situation in maligning Perry, but he put the boot in once investigators discovered that it was This, quite clearly, was the clarion subversion against the central people’s gov- the Hong Kong SAR”. Beijing was watching regardless. To have used the authority of being covertly fi nanced by “Stand with call that the legal profession expected. ernment, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit developments to see if Hong Kong was ready his o™ ce to harm Perry’s reputation like Hong Kong”, the very group which had Although the Bar Association has kept foreign political organisations or bodies from for a more broadly representative nominating this was deplorable, and, if he has any complained about the police in the fi rst silent, people of goodwill will hope that conducting political activities in the region, committee. decency, he must now issue a full retrac- place. One day, hopefully, somebody will its English counterpart, at least, will have and to prohibit political organisations or bod- Instead of reassuring Beijing that Hong tion, and apologize to Perry. explain to Seely that, in English law, there the guts to call out Raab and his outriders ies of the region from establishing ties with Kong is ready, some people, led by the opposi- One of Raab’s predecessors, Malcolm is a maxim that “no man should be a judge for their shameful treatment of a bar- foreign political organisations or bodies.” It is tion parties, asked to bypass the nominating Rifkind, another lawyer, also rushed up to in his own cause”, which people like him rister who practices in both jurisdictions. those who keep trying to block the enactment committee and bring in “civic nomination” kick Perry, imagining, like all bullies, that should not trample underfoot. The Law Society, moreover, pointed out of Article 23 in Hong Kong who are deviating and “party nomination”. Because these things there is safety in numbers. On January A little digging, moreover, yields yet that, under the Basic Law, the Depart- from the Sino-British Joint Declaration. Since are not in the Basic Law Beijing of course 14, in The Daily Telegraph, he declared more nuggets. Whereas Baroness (Helena) ment of Justice is vested with the control China does have sovereignty over Hong Kong, could not agree to that. Thus it is the “protest- that the trial was “the result of a political Kennedy QC declared that Perry’s deci- of criminal prosecutions, free from any and since the threat to national security has ers”, not Beijing, who have deviated from the decision taken by the Chinese and Hong sion to prosecute the case “will become a interference (Art.63), and that this must become apparent, no conscionable country Basic Law and thus the Sino-British Joint Kong authorities”, for which, of course, he source of shame”, she is also the chair of be respected. By declaring that it “strongly should declare introducing the NSL an intru- Declaration. So what is Britain up to? What produced no evidence, and accused Perry the International Bar Association’s Human condemns any attempt to assert pressure sion into Hong Kong’s freedoms. In a sense it freedoms has Beijing taken away from Hong of displaying “naivete and insensitivity of Rights Institute, which lends apparent to inhibit the proper functioning of law- was the protesters, who disrupted the lives of Kong people? a high order”. Unlike Raab, however, he credibility to her assessment. However, it yers”, the Society has said what needed to ordinary Hong Kong people that undermined UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab at least knew what the case was about, has now come to light that, on September be said, and barristers and solicitors alike Hong Kong people’s freedoms. Thus, apart claims: “China’s imposition of the National although he suggested that, instead of 26, 2019, at the height of the violent pro- will welcome this strident a™ rmation of from ensuring national security, the NSL also Security Law in Hong Kong constitutes a clear prosecuting it, Perry “should oŽ er his ser- tests in Hong Kong, and in an apparent lawyers’ independence at a critical time. helps protect Hongkongers’ personal safety, and serious breach of the Sino-British Joint vices for the defense”. gesture of solidarity, the IBA honored two Not for the fi rst time, therefore, the private property, public amenities and proper- Declaration contrary to international law”. Although Rifkind signed himself oŽ of the defendants, Martin Lee Chu-ming Law Society, which has approximately ties. The puzzle is why Western powers are so Where is the logic to this? The UK govern- as a “former Foreign Secretary”, there and Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, with its human 12,000 members, has provided the legal concerned about their national security, but ment says the “1984 declaration is a legally was, intriguingly, a crucial omission, rights award. It should, therefore, surprise profession with the leadership it needs. In at the same time completely disregard China’s binding treaty which commits to ensure the which sheds light on his mindset. Such nobody if the IBA is now trying to protect so doing, it has set a fi ne example, which need for national security. rights and freedoms of the people of Hong is his standing in anti-China circles that its own, even if it means traducing Perry. others will hopefully follow. By eschew- Article 45 of the Basic Law clearly stated Kong and maintain Hong Kong’s high degree the serial fantasist, Benedict Rogers, has Indeed, the Hong Kong Bar Association ing political posturing and looking after — and regrettably the Western press keeps of autonomy”. Where in the Joint Declaration recently appointed him a patron of Hong itself has long-standing connections with the interests of lawyers, it has shown ignoring — that “The method for selecting the can Mr Raab fi nd a clause that says Beijing Kong Watch, the propaganda outfi t which the IBA, and this may explain its failure to that it has got its priorities right, and this Chief Executive shall be specifi ed in the light would allow the freedom to undermine specializes in maligning the Hong Kong condemn Kennedy’s outburst. undoubtedly augurs well for the future of of the actual situation in the Hong Kong Spe- national security and particularly China’s ter- authorities and churning out fallacies After Perry withdrew from the case on criminal justice. cial Administrative Region and in accordance ritorial integrity? about China. Rifkind, however, presum- January 20, it became clear that a good with the principle of gradual and orderly ably deemed it prudent not to disclose his man had been victimized and that crimi- The views do not necessarily refl ect those progress”. “The ultimate aim is the selection The views do not necessarily refl ect those of role to the readers, particularly after one nal justice was under threat. Although the of China Daily. of the Chief Executive by universal suŽ rage China Daily.