Social News
Written by: Zhu Xinxin
2020-05-22 13:16
Last update date: 2020-05-22 13:16Guo Zhuojian, known as the "Cheung Chau Review King", was dissatisfied with the Legislative Council Chairman Liang Junyan's decision to replace Guo Rongkeng by referring to the "Rules of Procedure" in the election of the chairman in the Legislative Council, and therefore proposed a judicial review. The court applied for review permission, but the lawyer representing Liang et al. Pointed out that the election of the chairman of the council is an internal matter of the Legislative Council. The court should not intervene and the judge adjourned the decision.
The applicant is Guo Zhuojian, the respondent is the chairman of the Legislative Council, Leung Jun-yan, and the Member of Parliament, Chen Jianbo. Guo Zhuojian said outside the court that Liang ’s approach was "to fight against others, to change it if one wishes to change it", and also to refer to this review as "winning or losing is nothing, I have tried my best".
Guo believes that the elected chairman should be invalid
Guo Zhuojian, in accordance with Articles 72 (6) and 75 of the Basic Law, the power of the President of the Legislative Council should be restricted. He pointed out that due to various reasons, the chairman of the Association failed to be elected after 7 months. However, he pointed out that Liang Junyan and Chen Jianbo should not deprive Guo Rongkeng of chairing the election of the chairman of the internal conference.
Guo Zhuojian continued that Liang Junyan incorrectly used Article 92 of the Rules of Procedure and his decision should be invalid. And Chen Jianbo, who was appointed by Liang to replace Guo Rongkeng, under this circumstance to preside over the election of the chairman of the internal conference should also be invalid.
The court generally does not interfere with the internal affairs of the Legislative Council
Lawyers representing Liang and Chen responded that the case of the Court of Final Appeal is standing and the court generally does not interfere in the internal affairs of the Legislative Council unless it involves violations of the Basic Law or illegal situations. The election of the chairman of the internal council is an internal matter of the Legislative Council. Under this principle, the court should not intervene in this incident.
The lawyer also pointed out that Liang Junyan correctly used Article 92 of the "Rules of Procedure", but he pointed out that some members of the Legislative Council abused the "Rules of Procedure". After 7 months and 17 meetings, he still failed to elect the chairman of the internal meeting. The lawyer emphasized that the original intent of Article 72 of the Basic Law was to make the Legislative Council function normally, not to obstruct the work of the Legislative Council and the Internal Council. Therefore, Liang Junyan's approach did not violate the Basic Law.
The lawyer believes that Guo Zhuojian failed to present a reasonably arguable argument, and at the same time did not have sufficient rights to submit this judicial review, so he requested the court to reject his application.
Case number: HCAL 918/2020
Inside the meeting | Democracy approval system subverts the "Rules of Procedure", mentioning judicial review "not easy"
Internal controversy 〡Chen Jianbo presided over the internal conference election, bursting into conflict, many people were expelled
Controversy in the internal meeting 〡Li Huiqiong said that there will be a pan-popular tendency to not attend the future internal meeting when setting the agenda later
Disputes in the Legislative Council Guo Zhuojian Liang Junyan Judicial Review Court