A new report exposes the serious ethical problems non-permanent judges from the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada pose in Hong Kong’s current era of political persecution.

By Samuel Bickett | Hong Kong Law & Policy

Summary

Non-permanent judges (NPJs) from the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada have traditionally served as symbols of common law continuity and support for the rule of law as temporary appointees to Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal. That role is now in question due to Hong Kong’s changed political landscape and tensions between China and Western democracies.

A new report from the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation calls on Hong Kong’s foreign judges to resign and why. A perceived contradiction between the statements and values of foreign judges and the actions and outcomes of the Hong Kong judiciary is examined in light of the crackdown on rights and freedoms following the implementation of the National Security Law in 2020, along with the broader influence of the Chinese government over Hong Kong’s legal system.

The report argues that by continuing to serve on the Court of Final Appeal (CFA), these judges lend legitimacy to a system that is increasingly seen as compromised and aligned with Beijing’s interests, rather than upholding the rule of law and protecting human rights. The report concludes the CFA should be discontinued and that the current arrangement undermines the credibility of these judges and their home legal systems, and contributes to the erosion of judicial independence and human rights in Hong Kong.

Read the full article here at the publisher’s website

To read and download the report in full, see here

UPDATE: Controversial former Supreme Court of Canada judge steps down from Hong Kong court

FURTHER READING

Beverley McLachlin must leave Hong Kong