Top judge rebuffs localists’ argument
Accusation that Beijing ‘supplemented’ Basic Law in ruling not based on evidence and is ‘both arrogant and ignorant’, appeal court hears
It would be “arrogant” and “presumptuous” to accuse China’s top legislature without evidence of acting beyond its remit in its recent interpretation of the city’s mini-constitution, a Hong Kong judge presiding over the case of two disqualified localist lawmakers said on Thursday.
Chief judge of the High Court Mr Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung, in challenging the arguments of the two, also suggested the judiciary should have the power to intervene in the legislature’s affairs on constitutional grounds.
“The Basic Law trumps the common law, I am afraid,” Cheung said.
Newly elected localist lawmakers Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang and Yau Wai-ching were disqualified by the Court of First Instance two weeks ago after an unprecedented judicial challenge filed by the city’s chief executive. The court found the duo to have effectively declined to take their oaths faithfully with their anti-China antics during the swearing-in ceremony on October 12.
Their appeal was heard before Mr Justice Cheung and two fellow justices of appeal, Mr Justice Johnson Lam Man-hon and Mr Justice Jeremy Poon Shiu-chor.
Referring to the interpretation of Article 104 of the Basic Law by the National People’s Congress Standing Committee that laid out oath-taking requirements, which would entail immediate disqualification if violated, Cheung said Beijing’s ruling “cannot be avoided”.
