The denial of Jimmy Lai’s right to be defended by a lawyer of his choice casts serious doubt on Hong Kong’s legal future, says Dr Ping-fat Sze
- The decision of the first instance court, the appeal court and the final appeal court to allow a London silk to represent Hong Kong businessman Jimmy Lai, awaiting trial on national security charges, is now pending a final determination from the National People’s Congress in Beijing.
- Non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Hong Kong’s Basic Law seems to depend on the circumstances in question. The appointment of temporary judges by the chief justice serves as an apt example of this.
The rule of law in Hong Kong hit the headlines again at the end of last year, as the justice secretary turned to Beijing to stop a leading London silk, Tim Owen, defending Jimmy Lai against sedition and collusion charges under the national security law (see Baron Pannick, ‘Hong Kong media trial is crunch time for its rule of law’, The
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
