Hong Kong lawmakers defending Beijing intervene in the case

Pro-Beijing lawmakers have intervened for the first time in a major case in Hong Kong, with lawyers calling for a recent rise in the city’s independence law.

Judge Maria Yuen, wife of Geoffrey Ma, a former chief justice, should be appointed as the next judge in the Hong Kong High Court, two experts told the Financial Times.

But he stopped appearing in the city’s highest court after leaving parliament after raising concerns. Proponents of her case have been working to make the actual transcript of this statement available online. Proponents of her case have been working to make the actual transcript of this statement available online.

Beijing said lost at Hong Kong’s political and social media in response to anti-government protests in 2019, arresting democrats, politicians and journalists.

China has not changed much from the common law in Hong Kong. But any such migration will worries companies around the world, most of them have established the city’s capital probably because of its independent courts.

The Yuen nomination was approved last year by the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission, an independent law firm in Hong Kong, and is expected to be approved by Carrie Lam, the city’s mayor, two people who are aware of this.

Hong Kong’s parliament, the Parliament, has to confirm the nominees by a senior official in a major case. In the past, this seemed like a ritual.

But before Yuen’s proposal was finalized and sent to parliament for confirmation, Beijing lawmakers including Holden Chow and Elizabeth Quat raised concerns.

The House of Representatives in the field of justice and the rule of law, which is overseen by Beijing lawmakers, has asked prosecutors and government officials to discuss the decision.

Apart from their claim that Ma Ma could continue to rule in court through Yuen, the lawyers also said it took him a long time to pass judgments, according to someone who knows their views.

Political inquiries prompted Yuen to cancel his decision, according to two people who know what happened, the first known case of this kind. Yuen summoned all petitions to discuss the matter in court, which declined to comment.

The Commission then appointed another judge, Johnson Lam, to be appointed.

Insiders said Lam did not appear to be more cautious or generous in his views than Yuen, and there is no evidence that lawmakers followed Beijing’s orders.

But lawmakers were worried that Yuen’s case could serve as an example to the Beijing House of Representatives, which has Beijing’s political leaders, to review in court. This could undermine the authority of the JORC, the judicial committee.

Lawmakers say a political review could lead to judges being appointed because of their loyalty to Beijing and not their ability, and could block successful candidates from the forefront.

Johannes Chan, a law professor at the University of Hong Kong, described the Yuen case as “a very serious and disturbing development of the judiciary.”

“It provides an opportunity for political interference in the selection of prosecutors and a [legislature] this is being manipulated by pro-Beijing politicians, “Chan said.

Critics said the government’s idea last year be different judges in the case of the national security law, which was introduced in the region by Beijing last year as a result of the protests, has already hurt the idea of ​​independence.

Tong Ying-kit experiment, the first person paid according to the security law, it should start Wednesday before the judges.

Chow and Quat lawmakers declined to comment on Yuen’s case. Carrie Lam declined to comment but said: “All appointments of prosecutors are made in accordance with the Constitution”, a by-law of the region.

Geoffrey Ma declined to comment.

Horace Cheung, chairman of the Judiciary and the Judiciary, said he had joined forces with the government and the judiciary to “get the first impetus… On the issues raised by its members”.