Advertisement
Hong Kong courts
Hong KongPolitics

Hong Kong national security law: proposed legal change giving city leader final say on role of foreign lawyers in cases won’t be retrospective

  • Justice minister Paul Lam gives first official confirmation of reach of new rule, sparked by collusion case involving jailed tycoon Jimmy Lai
  • But Lam, who was addressing lawmakers, did not rule out resorting to other means to block earlier applications

Reading Time:4 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
4
A banner promoting National Security Education Day flanks the ferry pier at Tsim Sha Tsui. Photo: Edmond So
Willa Wu
A proposed legal amendment giving Hong Kong’s leader the final say on the role of foreign lawyers in national security cases will not be retrospective, the city’s justice minister has said in the first official clarification on the potential reach of the new rule.
Advertisement
But Secretary for Justice Paul Lam Ting-kwok on Friday did not rule out resorting to other means to block previous applications, making an apparent reference to Timothy Owen, the British barrister hired by jailed media tycoon Jimmy Lai Chee-ying for his collusion case last year that sparked the legal changes in question.
At a Legislative Council panel meeting, the Hong Kong Bar Association also took the chance to demand more clarity on the landmark amendments from the government, urging it to clearly define the scope of national security cases to protect public interests and the rights of defendants.
Secretary for Justice Paul Lam. Photo: Nora Tam
Secretary for Justice Paul Lam. Photo: Nora Tam

The Department of Justice proposed a series of amendments to the Legal Practitioners Ordinance last month which will require courts to obtain the chief executive’s approval before a foreign lawyer is allowed to take on a national security case. The city leader can deny permission if the counsel’s participation is deemed “contrary to the interests of national security”.

Lam confirmed for the first time during the meeting that the proposed changes would not be retrospective, but hinted that previous applications such as Owen’s could still be barred.

“We cannot rule out the possibility that some previous applications involved national security. I believe there will be other ways to handle them. But that has nothing to do with the amendments,” he said.

Some lawmakers previously pointed to existing administrative mechanisms, arguing that immigration authorities could deny Owen entry into the city.

Advertisement