Lie Xianlun: The court has a part in creating chaos on the street and denounces the judge of the High Court that the "Prohibition of Masking Law" is unconstitutional

Political situation

Written by: Zhou Lixi

2020-09-03 13:44

Last update date: 2020-09-03 13:46

The former permanent judge of the Court of Final Appeal Lie Xianlun published an article today (3rd) saying that Hong Kong's judicial system has lost the trust of Beijing and needs urgent reform.

He pointed out that every time a local court tried to apply the Basic Law in a judgment, it might have an impact on Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy. He believed that the court allowed lawyers to reverse the Basic Law, which would eventually lead to the central government’s distrust of the local judiciary.

In particular, he criticized the judges of the High Court in the "Prohibition of Face Masking Act" case by deciding Hong Kong's constitutional order and "elevating themselves to the position of the National People's Congress."

Lie Xianlun also pointed out that the court continued to subordinate public interests to the claims of individual rights, giving those who took to the streets to violently protest a sense of "personal sovereignty", describing the courts in the past year to help create a society that led to chaos on the streets surroundings.

In response, Guo Rongkeng, a member of the legislative council of the legal profession, said that most judges and legal practitioners would not agree with Lie Xianlun’s views, and should even be disgusted. He criticized his arguments for being inconsistent with the facts and unreasonable to judges and legal practitioners. attack.

Lie Xianlun: The Judiciary Has Lost the Trust of Beijing

Lie Xianlun wrote an article titled "It's Time for Urgent Reform", saying that recent events have made him three discoveries: 1. In order to maintain Hong Kong’s unique characteristics from the Mainland and maintain Hong Kong’s long-term prosperity, "One Country, Two Systems" will continue after 2047. Implementation is of utmost importance; 2. In order for the "One Country, Two Systems" to function normally, Hong Kong and the central government must trust each other; 3. The operation of the Hong Kong judiciary has obviously lost the trust of Beijing, so Article 44 of the Hong Kong National Security Law stipulates , The chief executive, not the chief judge, is responsible for selecting judges to handle national security cases.

Lie Xianlun believes that Beijing's distrust of the Hong Kong judiciary is related to the interpretation of the Basic Law by local courts in some cases, which understates the use of obscure overseas norms and values, but he questions these values ​​and The regulations have nothing to do with the specific issues of the case, and they are completely unsuitable for Hong Kong.

He criticized the practice for being fundamentally wrong and contrary to the purpose of common law. He pointed to perhaps the most shocking example of the "Prohibition of Face Masking Act" judgement in November last year. He criticized the court's understanding of the "One Country, Two Systems" policy, "it was too slow. People are dumbfounded."

He criticized that these judges "elevated themselves to the position of the National People's Congress," and self-empowered to knock down a vital piece of major legislation. No wonder the verdict immediately aroused fierce criticism from the Legal Work Committee of the National People's Congress.

He also pointed out that the court continued to subordinate public interests to claims of individual rights, which gave those who took to the streets to violently protest a sense of personal sovereignty, "The law that protects the majority of people has been broken, but there is no punishment. People think their personal demands are paramount. In fact, the courts have helped create a social environment that leads to chaos on the streets in the past year."

Lie Xianlun believes that the operation of Hong Kong's judiciary has lost the trust of Beijing. Therefore, the "Hong Kong National Security Law" stipulates that the Chief Executive, not the chief judge, is responsible for selecting judges to handle national security cases.

(Profile picture)

[Prohibition of masking law] Lie Xianlun said that the emergency law has existed for a long time, and the high court's ruling is unconstitutional.

Dismantling the Bureau | "Separation of Powers" and another dispute over the establishment of the system is to closely follow the central refutation of "judicial dominance"

National Security Law | Former Beijing official Xu Ze wrote an article criticizing "judicial dominance" and questioned Li Guoneng's view of violation of the Basic Law

Hong Kong version of the National Security Law｜The Chief Executive's Designation of Judges Lawyers Association Issues a Statement Questioning Will Undermine Judicial Independence

Hong Kong version of the National Security Law｜The Bar Association: The Chief Executive’s Designation of Judges to Trial Cases Cuts Judicial Independence Unprecedentedly

Challenge the court to let lawyers reverse the Basic Law

Lie Xianlun pointed out that the "one country, two systems" policy has never changed, and the Basic Law has given this policy substance.

He emphasized that the Basic Law is a constitutional document, not a civil code used to manage Hong Kong’s daily affairs. He questioned the use of the Basic Law to deal with local grievances. He believed that the court allowed lawyers to play forensic games and used the provisions of the Basic Law as a major Weapons of mass destruction, against government agencies and other institutions.

He also criticized that the judges of the High Court did not seem to realize that every time they tried to apply the Basic Law, they might have an impact on Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy, because the final interpretation power of the Basic Law is not in the Hong Kong courts but in the hands of Beijing.

Lie Xianlun also questioned that the Bar Association has repeatedly stated that Beijing is "interfering" in Hong Kong affairs, believing that they have been making rhetoric to "confuse the court," and that the lawyer representing the government has not pointed out this abnormal practice.

He criticized the court for allowing lawyers to reverse the Basic Law and use it to destroy the building of law and order, which ultimately led to the arrangement of Article 44 of the National Security Law of the Minato District.

Regarding the Western media's criticism of Beijing's brutal passage of Article 44 to undermine judicial independence, Lie Xianlun asked, "When the court fails to fulfill the main role conferred by the constitution and obediently turns the court into a forum for debate, the long-term interests of Hong Kong are the most important. Will the sovereign still remain silent?"

Regarding the way forward for the judiciary, Lie Xianlun pointed to what President Xi Jinping said or set in a speech in 2014: "We...have an incomparably vast stage and an incomparably profound historical background...We must humbly learn from the creation of human society. All the achievements of civilization, but we can’t forget our ancestors, we can’t copy other countries’ development models, and we will never accept any foreign preaching.” (AP)

On the vision of the judicial system quoted by Xi Jinping's speech: not copying other countries

Lie Xianlun said that Hong Kong had a sound and effective common law system when it returned. He asked who can honestly say that this system is still tailor-made for the city.

He believes that the current judiciary is plagued by abuses and needs to be reformed. The system must get rid of red tape, show facts and reason, instead of seeking truth from belief in ideology; it is necessary to inject new impetus into common law and make it consistent with the current situation in Hong Kong; Make the system in line with the original intent.

At the end of the article, Lie Xianlun pointed out that perhaps the way forward was set by President Xi Jinping’s speech in 2014. He quoted as saying: "We...have an incomparably vast stage and an incomparably profound historical background...We must be humbly learn from mankind. All the achievements of civilization created by society, but we cannot forget our ancestors, copy the development models of other countries, and will never accept any foreign preaching."

Guo Rongkeng's criticism of Lie Xianlun's argument is neither true to facts, but also an unreasonable attack on judges and legal practitioners.

(Profile picture / Photo by Luo Junhao)

Guo Rongkeng: Fortunately, Li Xianlun is a retired judge

Guo Rongkeng responded on Facebook saying that he believes that most judges and legal practitioners will not agree with Lie Xianlun’s views, and should even be disgusted, because his arguments are neither true to facts, but also unreasonable attacks on judges and legal practitioners. .

Guo Rongkeng said that most of the legal profession and Hong Kong citizens believe that the National People's Congress has repeatedly interpreted the law and enacted the "Hong Kong National Security Law", which not only impacts the rule of law in Hong Kong, but also seriously weakens the citizens' individual rights and freedoms.

He criticized Lie Xianlun’s downfall and blamed the social dissatisfaction caused by the government’s bad governance on the judges and citizens. He believed that his remarks would only make the legal profession and the people of Hong Kong think that the rule of law he said was a Chinese rule of law, not Hong Kong’s original and internationally recognized rule of law.

He ridiculed that the legal profession and the people of Hong Kong were fortunate that Li Xianlun was already a retired judge and did not need to try cases.

Xi Jinping Thought (Xi Thought) Xi Jinping Visits Hong Kong Lit Hin Lun Judiciary Guo Rongkeng Ban Masking Method