China just hinted it may upend Hong Kong’s legal system over the mask ban

Hong Kong CNN  — 

In a surprise decision Monday, a Hong Kong court threw out a month-old mask ban the government had introduced in the hopes of stemming the city’s ongoing political unrest.

But the ruling has provoked anger in China, with the country’s top legislature signaling that it may use this as an opportunity to drastically rewrite Hong Kong’s legal framework.

The original ban was introduced by the city’s embattled leader, Carrie Lam, using colonial-era emergency powers in the case of “public danger or emergency.”

On Monday, the court said that these powers, at least in the case of “public danger,” were unconstitutional and had been superseded by the city’s de facto constitution, the Basic Law.

That constitution was adopted following Hong Kong’s handover from Britain to China in 1997, and grants citizens in the semi-autonomous Chinese city freedoms that are unheard of on the mainland.

Following the court’s decision, the Hong Kong government said the controversial ban would no longer be enforced while it considered appealing. However, according to China’s top legislature, Hong Kong courts have no power to rule on the constitutionality of legislation under the city’s Basic Law.

“The constitution and the Basic Law together form the constitutional basis of the special administrative region,” a spokesman for the National People’s Congress, China’s rubber-stamp parliament, said Tuesday. “Whether a law … is in conformity with the Basic Law … can only be judged and decided by the NPC Standing Committee, and no other organ has the right to judge or decide.”

Were this rhetoric to be put into action, it could effectively end the right to judicial review in Hong Kong, a bedrock of the city’s rule of law. It’s also just the type of overreach from Beijing that has brought people out onto the streets for months.

While the NPC does have the constitutional right to “interpret” the Basic Law as a de facto supreme court, and has done several times in the past to great controversy, the assertion that lower courts cannot rule on constitutional matters is totally out of keeping with both the basic tenets of common law and Hong Kong jurisprudence.

In this picture taken on November 13, 2019, a molotov cocktail, a gas mask and a yellow construction helmet are placed upon a bust of late hotel tycoon Hui Yeung Shing, who was dubbed "King of Hotels," at the campus of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) in Hong Kong. - Pro-democracy protesters on November 13 stepped up a "blossom everywhere" campaign of road blocks and vandalism across Hong Kong that has crippled the international financial hub this week and ignited some of the worst violence in five months of unrest. (Photo by ANTHONY WALLACE / AFP) (Photo by ANTHONY WALLACE/AFP via Getty Images)
Hong Kong leader bans wearing masks at protests
02:00 - Source: CNN

‘End of the rule of law’

The pronouncement, which was echoed in aggressive editorials in state media, was greeted with shock by legal observers in the city.

“If this is a formal/official position, then this completely and fundamentally alters the landscape of the Hong Kong legal system and could quite legitimately be said to mean the end of the rule of law as we know it in Hong Kong,” said Antony Dapiran, a Hong Kong-based lawyer and author of “City of Protest.”

“More specifically: it would mean the death of ‘separation of powers’ in Hong Kong, a doctrine fundamental to the common law rule of law – and one Beijing comprehensively rejects. A fundamental principle of rule of law is that everyone, including the legislature and executive, is subject to law. Government’s lawmaking must be lawful (consistent with constitution/Basic Law). The courts through an independent judiciary ‘police’ that.”

Hong Kong courts have ruled in the past on constitutional matters without criticism from the Chinese government. In 2017, the city’s Court of Final Appeal found the Hong Kong government’s refusal to grant a partner visa to the wife of a British expat was unconstitutional, even though the city does not recognize same-sex marriage.

“The exercise of judicial power means the power to give binding and enforceable adjudications on legal disputes,” Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma said after that case. “In the public law sphere, the power exists in the courts even to strike down legislation or executive acts if they are shown to have been made in violation of constitutional principles.”

In other common law systems, courts also regularly strike down legislation which falls outside of constitutional limits or contradicts binding human rights treaties such as the European Convention on Human Rights.

The tension between the right of judicial review and the Chinese system – which is often described as “rule by law” and frees the Communist Party to rewrite legislation as it sees fit and order courts to enforce it – has been a long-running one in Hong Kong since 1997.