Last week, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress interpreted the "Hong Kong National Security Law" for the first time. Foreign media published articles criticizing it one after another. Among them, the Wall Street Journal's editorial titled "Ji-ying Lai will not get her lawyer" described the interpretation as an abuse legal system.
The British "Times" has an article titled "Hong Kong to decide who can defend Li Zhiying", saying that Hong Kong will decide whether the British Queen's Counsel can represent Li Zhiying by the administrative agency, not the court.
The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress interpreted Articles 14 and 47 of the "Hong Kong National Security Law" last Friday, stipulating that if overseas lawyers without local practice qualifications want to participate in local cases involving national security laws, they should first obtain a certificate issued by the chief executive. If no application is made, it will be handed over to the National Security Council for judgment.
The relevant decisions are not subject to judicial review.
Chief Executive Li Jiachao emphasized in a meeting with reporters after the announcement of the decision by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress that this interpretation is not aimed at individual cases.
However, the "Wall Street Journal" published an editorial in the name of editorial review. The article began with "the communist regime and its factotums abuse the legal system to achieve their goals. The latest example occurred in Hong Kong. The article described Chief Executive Li Jiachao as "begging" Beijing assisted him in preventing Jimmy Lai from hiring Tim Owen, Queen's Counsel for defense, and the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress's decision to interpret the law is tantamount to blocking the right to judicial review of foreign lawyers' decisions on national security law cases involving administrative agencies in the future.
As for the British "Times", there is an article written by a legal editor titled "Hong Kong to decide who can defend Li Zhiying", saying that Li Zhiying was accused of violating the "Hong Kong National Security Law". The National Security Council, not the court, decides whether Li Zhiying can hire the British Queen's Counsel to represent the defense.
The article described the decision as tantamount to "overturning" the original ruling of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, and even quoted human rights organizations saying that the decision was tantamount to "putting one more nail in the coffin of the rule of law in Hong Kong."
National People's Congress Interpretation｜Wrote an article in support of the Final Court Liang Aishi: Because he doesn't like to influence the court's decision-making behavior, the National People's Congress interpretation of the law is the Hong Kong government's national security education. Interpretation of Laws and Overseas Lawyers National People's Congress Interpretation︱How does the Chief Executive's "Certificate" mechanism work?
Li Zhiying's employment certificate was overturned?
National People's Congress Interpretation｜Tan Huizhu: It will not affect Hong Kong's judicial power to clarify administrative power to deal with national security issues. National People's Congress Interpretation｜Legal Work Committee: The effect of the interpretation can be traced back to the day when the National Security Law came into effect. Unbiased handling of the national security case NPC Interpretation of Law｜Chen Hongyi: There is no denial of the final court ruling. Li Zhiying can apply for a certificate from the Chief Executive.
Tang Jiahua said that the National Security Committee will not ignore the National People’s Congress’s interpretation of the law if it does not target individual cases｜Li Jiachao emphasized that there is no increase in powers, only to clarify the National Security Committee and the chief executive’s powers and the National Security Council’s interpretation of the law｜If you hire an overseas lawyer for a national security case, you need a certificate from the chief executive, otherwise the National Security Committee should intervene
