Why two UK judges resigned from Hong Kong’s top court

Two top British courts have resigned from Hong Kong’s highest judge, with one citing” the political position” in the area.

Lords Lawrence Collins and Jonathan Sumption’s departure comes a month after a landmark case in which 14 democracy activists were found guilty of subterfuge.

The original British Supreme Court justices are two of the ten foreign judges who serve on Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal, a remnant of the state’s long history as a British colony.

After China enacted safety laws that critics claim silence dissent, legal experts and European governments have warned that the rule of law is in danger in Hong Kong.

But Hong Kong’s state denies this and claims the city is still a major control.

On Thursday, Lord Collins, who had sat on the court since 2012, said he was resigning “because of the social position in Hong Kong”.

He said in a press release that” but I continue to have the fullest confidence in the court and the members ‘ complete independence.”

Lord Sumption did not issue a speech, Reuters news agency reported. Both judges have asked the BBC to reply.

Their departure comes in addition to the departure of three different well-known American judges in recent years.

Hong Kong’s president John Lee expressed lament over the judges ‘ defections, but highlighted Lord Collins ‘ opinions on the remaining magistrates ‘ freedom.

He argued that Hong Kong’s safety regulations had” transitioned from chaos to order” and that the state’s protection regulations had been upheld.

” That did not, in accordance with the law, alter the human rights and freedoms that people enjoy. Nor did it change the authorities ‘ exercise of impartial judicial authority, free from any intervention” he said.

Eight foreign judges are now serving on Hong Kong’s top judge from the UK, Australia, and Canada.

Usually, a chair for an appeal event may consist of the main fairness, three Hong Kong courts and a international judge.

In this role as “non-permanent” appointees, they are paid up to £40,000 according to reports.

Since the UK re-done the place to China in 1997, the Court of Final Appeal has continued to operate in this manner.

Hong Kong’s continued use of it as a global economic hub was viewed as a bulwark protection to support the common law system in the European style.

In its constitutional system, foreign companies had more belief than in that of mainland China.

However, according to critics, this system has been harmed by Beijing’s crackdown on the town in the wake of common pro-democracy demonstrations in 2019.

The impact of two national security rules ( NSL), the first of which was passed in 2020 and the second of which was passed in March, is perceived by authorities as having override rights and freedoms that are otherwise protected by the state’s constitutional Basic Law.

In the past few years, hundreds of people have been detained in violation of NSL and denied the constitutional protections that are usually reserved for those who are facing legal action.

For instance, the majority of NSL accused in Hong Kong have been detained for a number of months before being released from custody.

In the Hong Kong 47 case verdict last week, some defendants were held for more than two years before their trial began.

Veteran Australian determine James Spigelman left the Court of Final Appeal in 2020 because he worried about the law’s broad opportunity.

Therefore, in 2022, Robert Reed and Patrick Hodge, two of the longest-serving members of the UK Supreme Court, stepped up in response to concerns raised by the American authorities.

Lord Reed said he supported the government by allowing current UK Supreme Court members to leave their positions without pleading with them for a state that had “deviated from principles of political independence and freedom of expression.”

Rights groups and European governments, including the US, UK, EU people, and Australia, have been voiced concerns about Hong Kong’s legal system, and the remaining unusual courts have since been under increasing pressure to recuse themselves.

The remaining unusual judges on the CFA issued a statement defending their place in 2022 when the sitting UK Supreme Court judges cut relationships.

Lords Collins and Sumption, two judges who were present at the time, said they thought their” continued contribution” may be “in the interest of the people of Hong Kong.”

The resignations on Thursday are just the most recent mark of concern for the world’s legal system.

A 43-page legal mind issued in 2022, signed by a number of senior legal characters, including Sir Robert Buckland, a former UK attorney-general, warned that the government was using Hong Kong’s foreign judges to gain credibility.

It stated to the courts that they were employed in a lawful environment where the Chinese authorities had the authority to determine the results of circumstances and judicial independence had been “wholly undermined.”

Alvin Cheung, a previous Hong Kong attorney and current constitutional scholar at Queen’s University in Canada, has written extensively about the changes to the system since NSL. He claimed to the BBC last year that he thought the magistrates were “delusional” because they believed they might have any mitigating power.

He claimed that because they are generally not asked to preside over contentious cases, they may cling on to a sense of judicial independence.

” They have a lovely little trip for a couple of months, they hear a couple of situations and therefore they’re flown out again”, he said.

However, Hong Kong authorities vehemently support the impartiality of its authorities.

” All magistrates and judicial officials will continue to administer justice in full accordance with the law, in full accordance with the law, without fear or favor, self-interest or dishonesty,” declared Andrew Cheung, the chief justice of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal.

He added that the most recent defections would not have an impact on how the court operated.