Mainland-style Justice Has Arrived In HK: Lawyers

Leading Hong Kong lawyers are warning of a stark new era of mainland justice as they digest the full impact of the new national security law imposed directly by Beijing.

The possibility of mainland agents whisking suspects to the mainland for trial and prison – a prospect effectively blocked last year amid large-scale protests against an extradition plan – is one of several changes that is alarming some in the legal, business and diplomatic communities.

Both Asian and Western envoys are watching developments closely, fearing their own nationals in the city could now be at greater risk, particularly as tensions spike between Beijing and Western governments over trade, human rights and the handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

Under the new law, Hong Kong will also have its own national security agency, that will supervise a special local police unit with extra powers of search, electronic surveillance and asset seizure.

"In that single article alone, they are reversing years of safeguards of human rights that have been built up by case law," said Simon Young, a professor at the University of Hong Kong's law school.

"The less we disturb this law by coming within its radar, the better," he added, noting that even if Hong Kong's courts applied the law according to common law principles, they could be overruled by the National People's Congress Standing Committee.

Other lawyers described "the ground shifting beneath our feet", saying it was unclear how the laws, drafted in Beijing, could be aligned with Hong Kong's human rights protections.

The laws, for example, make several references to "state secrets", linking their theft to the crime of colluding with foreign governments as well as providing for court cases behind closed doors and without juries.

While it grants the Chief Executive the power to certify to a court that something is a secret, much greater clarity is needed, lawyers and diplomats said.

One senior Hong Kong barrister urged the Hong Kong government to clarify the many grey areas.

"Whoever drafted it was not apparently cognisant of common law principles, so it is proving very hard to fully grasp at this point," the barrister said.

"There are likely to be all kinds of devils in the details." (Reuters)