The president of the UK’s supreme court is to hear the case of a leading Hong Kong pro-democracy activist, prompting claims that Britain’s most senior judge is “being used” by the CCP to advance its interests. Lord Falconer of Thoroton QC, the shadow attorney-general, said that Lords Reed and Hodge should not have agreed to sit on the Hong Kong bench.
The Times: with contribution from Lord Falconer.
Top judge ‘being used’ to aid China’s agenda in Hong Kong
Jonathan Ames, Legal Editor
Saturday August 28 2021, 12.01am, The Times
The president of the UK’s supreme court is to hear the case of a leading Hong Kong pro-democracy activist, prompting claims that Britain’s most senior judge is “being used” by China to advance its interests.
Lord Reed of Allermuir confirmed yesterday that he is to hear the appeal of Leung Kwok-hung, a campaigner who was dismissed from Hong Kong’s legislative council after refusing to take a pro-Beijing oath of office. It led to questions over the role of British judges in the territory.
Reed’s announcement came as elections to the Law Society of Hong Kong reignited concerns over the rule of law there. A prominent US lawyer has withdrawn from the contest, claiming that his family had been threatened. Five pro-Beijing lawyers unseated a group of western-orientated candidates.
Reed and Lord Hodge, the deputy president of the Supreme Court, sit as overseas judges on Hong Kong’s final court of appeal, the highest bench. They are part of a group of eight senior British judges who sit part-time on the Hong Kong court. Critics have said that their continued presence gives legitimacy to China’s crackdown on democracy in the territory.
Leung was one of a dozen pro-democracy campaigners elected to the Hong Kong legislative council in 2016. They used the ceremony in which they took their oaths of office to make pro-democracy and anti-Beijing statements. As a result their oaths were ruled invalid and Leung and several of the others were dismissed from the council.
Leung challenged his dismissal in the courts. Two sets of judges have found against him, ruling that “his manner of taking the oath amounted to the neglect or denial of taking the oath”.
Reed will be on a five-strong judicial panel hearing the case, which is due to begin on Tuesday. He will be joined on the bench by Andrew Cheung Kui-nung, the Hong Kong court’s chief justice, and three other local judges.
His participation led to renewed criticism from Labour. Lord Falconer of Thoroton QC, the shadow attorney-general, said that Reed and Hodge should not have agreed to sit on the Hong Kong bench.
“They will hear cases like the validity of the requirement for a pro-Beijing oath by Hong Kong legislators,” he said. “If they approve laws like that in court imagine how helpful that is to the Chinese government. The UK Supreme Court office holders should not let themselves be used by a government that the UK says is breaking the Sino-UK agreement on Hong Kong and is undermining the rule of law.”
Reed acknowledged that the role of the UK judges on the court — who include the former Supreme Court presidents Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury — remains under scrutiny.
Reed said that he had been “closely monitoring and assessing developments in Hong Kong” and discussed the situation with the foreign secretary and lord chancellor.
He said: “Our shared assessment is that the judiciary in Hong Kong continues to act largely independently of government and their decisions continue to be consistent with the rule of law.
“There continues to be widespread support among the legal community in Hong Kong for the participation of UK and other overseas judges in the work of the Hong Kong court of final appeal.”
