Ted Hui is one of Hong Kong’s most wanted people.
He is which were fueled by a plan to allow extradition from the special administrative region to mainland China.
Critics feared the bill was an attempt to undermine the independence of Hong Kong’s judiciary and endanger dissent. Although it was withdrawn, Beijing responded by imposing a draconian 2020 national security law aimed at cracking down on all forms of dissent.
Hui was forced to flee to Australia while on bail for charges related to the protests.
Former Hong Kong Democratic MP Ted Hui. Source: Getty / South China Morning Post
“It was a disgrace,” Hui told SBS News.
“Millions of people took to the streets and the police cracked down on us.
“Then came endless persecutions… that’s why I had to leave Hong Kong at that time and go into exile.”
Hui is one of the most prominent voices of the Hong Kong democracy movement and is also part of a group of activists abroad, including Australian citizen Kevin Yam, for whom Hong Kong authorities have issued arrest warrants.
as a reward for information leading to their arrest.
Ted Hui has criticised Australian judges serving on the Hong Kong High Court, describing the situation as an increasingly hostile environment. Source: AFP / Anthony Wallace
Hui, who now lives and practices law in Adelaide, criticizes the Australian judges sitting on the Hong Kong Court of Appeal in what he calls an increasingly hostile environment.
Hong Kong authorities passed another security law, Article 23, earlier this year in a move the government said was necessary to promote stability.
The law applies to crimes such as treason, sedition, espionage, theft of state secrets and outside interference. It also allows trials to be held behind closed doors.
Hong Kong’s legislature has passed a new security law, Article 23, which the government says is crucial to maintaining stability. Source: AP / Vincent Yu
“There is no freedom in Hong Kong… there is no freedom of assembly, and if people criticize the government, the government will lock us up,” Hui said.
“All the freedom and democracy we once knew has now collapsed.”
Foreign judges in Hong Kong
The involvement of foreign judges in Hong Kong dates back to 1997, when Hong Kong, a former British colony, was returned to China. The Court of Appeal was established as the territory’s highest court.
Some critics say that the current system is designed to preserve the city’s international image and demonstrate that the judiciary is independent of Chinese rule.
“It must be a system that recognises that Hong Kong’s common law system is consistent with Western democracies,” Hui said.
“But at the same time [the foreign judges] “They are lending their own reputations and the integrity of their respective jurisdictions to Hong Kong’s already hollowed-out and authoritarian regime.”
Four Australian judges will remain on Hong Kong’s High Court despite calls from critics to step down. Source: AFP / Peter Parken
According to the judiciary of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, foreign temporary judges have made important contributions to the development of Hong Kong’s legal system.
In a statement to SBS Cantonese, the press and public relations department wrote: “They [overseas non-permanent common law judges] are all experts in the field of common law, specializing in different areas of law.”
“They have rich legal experience and are known for their noble, professional status and reputation.”
There are seven non-permanent foreign common law judges, three British and four Australian, on the Court of Appeal. Previous foreign judges came from other common law jurisdictions such as Canada and New Zealand.
The Australian judges currently serving are former Supreme Court Justices Patrick Keane and William Gummow, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Robert French and, as of May this year, the court’s newest foreign appointment, former Chief Justice of the Federal Court James Allsop.
All the freedom and democracy we once knew has now collapsed.
Ted Hui
The retired Australian judges serve in their personal capacity and receive briefings from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) on Australia’s approach to Hong Kong’s national security legislation.
French defended his role at the High Court, telling SBS News in a statement he also previously gave to the Sydney Morning Herald that he “is good, decent people and highly qualified judges who are indispensable to the rule of law in Hong Kong”.
“A mass resignation would be detrimental to the rule of law and contribute to Hong Kong’s isolation from international legal thinking,” the statement said.
Since the introduction of the national security law in Beijing, at least six foreign judges have resigned from the Supreme Court. Not all judges have given this as a reason for their resignation.
In June of this year, three foreign judges resigned within a week.
After his departure, former British Supreme Court Justice Jonathan Sumption wrote in the Financial Times: “Hong Kong, once a vibrant and politically diverse community, is slowly turning into a totalitarian state. The rule of law has been seriously eroded in every area where the government has strong feelings.”
Jonathan Sumption, a former foreign High Court judge, says Hong Kong is “slowly becoming a totalitarian state”. Source: MONKEY / AAPIMAGE
According to Alyssa Fong, public affairs manager at the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation, these resignations are leaving Australian judges increasingly isolated.
“What do these judges care that they feel they should stay because the rule of law in Hong Kong has clearly been curtailed?” Fong told SBS News.
“I know Australian judges have said before that it would be insulting to suggest that it is about the money, namely the $78,000 Australian dollars per hearing that they get.
“It feels like the judges are either completely unaware of what happened [in Hong Kong]or they ignore what is happening.”
‘A fig leaf of a fair trial’
While the Hong Kong High Court is hearing appeals in a range of civil and criminal cases, sentences upheld by the court include those of a teenager who shone a flashlight at a police officer during a protest and
“[Jimmy Lai] “He has been in solitary confinement for over three and a half years now, simply because he is a journalist and believes in the democratic values that Australians hold dear,” Caoilfhionn Gallagher, a lawyer at Doughty Street Chambers in London and head of Lai’s international legal team, told SBS News.
“He has been the victim of lawfare… he has already served sentences for peaceful protest activities, he is serving a sentence on completely false charges involving fraud, and he is now being tried under the national security law, which has been roundly condemned by Australia, the United Nations and many countries around the world.”
Jimmy Lai is a democracy advocate in Hong Kong and founder of Apple Daily, a newspaper that advocates freedom of expression. Source: MONKEY / Kin Cheung/AP
Gallagher describes the selection of foreign judges for the Court of Appeal as a “difficult issue”.
“While Jimmy Lai is going through this process, we are simultaneously getting a fig leaf of a fair trial in the Hong Kong system,” she said.
“I think this is a form of legal washing and Hong Kong is being presented as if it [the] “We should not adhere to the rule of law, but recognize what it has become.”
According to a DFAT spokesperson, the Australian government continues to push for the withdrawal of the national security law in Hong Kong and “is deeply concerned about the systematic erosion of Hong Kong’s rights, freedoms, autonomy and democratic processes”.
According to estimates by the Hong Kong Democracy Council, there are more than 1,800 political prisoners in Hong Kong.
Gordon Ng, who holds dual Australian and Hong Kong citizenship, is among those convicted on national security charges.
In my view, this is a form of legal washing and Hong Kong is being presented as adhering to the rule of law, rather than acknowledging what it has become.
Caoilfhionn Gallagher
Senator David Fawcett, deputy chair of the parliamentary standing committee on foreign affairs, defence and trade, told SBS News: “The presence of our judges there has no impact on the way these fundamentally undemocratic and oppressive laws are applied, despite the fact that there is an agreement between the UK and China, held by the UN, which is supposed to still be valid.”
“The fact that they [foreign judges] “The fact that someone is not allowed to appear in a case involving the national security law does not address the fact that the national security law infringes on fundamental human rights… and so their presence there and their ruling in other cases that may intersect with it is in effect an implementation of the national security law.”
“The rule of law is like a woven fabric: you can’t say this part of the system is fair because the rest may be problematic.
“It’s like cream in your coffee, it’s just impossible to isolate it.”
This story was produced in collaboration with SBS Cantonese.
DEKYAS NEWS World Breaking News and Trusted Source
