Hong Kong:
Hong Kong’s prime court on Tuesday ordered pro-democracy media tycoon Jimmy Lai to remain behind bars as it sided with prosecutors in the initially legal test of Beijing’s sweeping new national safety law.
The landmark case cements the dramatic modifications the safety law has begun generating to semi-autonomous Hong Kong’s frequent law traditions as Beijing seeks to snuff out dissent in the restless monetary hub.
Lai, the 73-year-old owner of pro-democracy tabloid Apple Daily, is one of more than one hundred activists arrested below the law considering the fact that it was enacted in June, and the highest-profile figure to be placed in pre-trial custody.
He has been charged with “colluding with foreign forces” — one of the new safety crimes — for allegedly calling for sanctions against Hong Kong and China.
The safety law is the most pronounced shift in Hong Kong’s connection with China considering the fact that it was handed back by Britain in 1997.
It criminalised a host of political views and toppled the legal firewall amongst the two territories.
Written in Beijing and imposed by fiat final June, it makes it possible for mainland safety agents to operate openly in the city for the initially time, and even grants China jurisdiction in some circumstances.
Tuesday’s judgement centred about bail.
Presumption of bail becoming granted for non-violent crimes is a hallmark of Hong Kong’s legal method.
But the national safety law removes that presumption.
Instead, it states “no bail shall be granted to a criminal suspect or defendant unless the judge has sufficient grounds for believing that (they) will not continue to commit acts endangering national security”.
Lower court error
Lai was detained in December and released on bail for about a week immediately after a reduce court granted him HK$10 million (US$1.3 million) bail collectively with a stringent list of needs, like property arrest, no interviews and no social media posts.
But he was place back behind bars days immediately after the prosecution sought to challenge these bail circumstances.
On Tuesday, a panel of 5 senior judges agreed with the prosecution and ruled that the reduce court judge had erred in granting Lai bail.
The safety law, the judges wrote, “creates such a specific exception to the general rule in favour of the grant of bail and imports a stringent threshold requirement for bail applications”.
Legal analysts are closely watching the case for an indication of no matter whether Hong Kong’s judiciary will serve — or even can serve — as any sort of constitutional brake against Beijing’s safety law.
The judiciary can only interpret laws, which are commonly passed by Hong Kong’s semi-elected legislature.
During challenges to new legislation, judges balance the wording of a law against frequent law traditions and core liberties such as freedom of speech and presumption of bail that are enshrined in Hong Kong’s mini-constitution and its Bill of Rights.
But the national safety legislation was penned straight by Beijing and appears set to trump any other legislation in the occasion of a dispute.
In Hong Kong’s complicated constitutional hierarchy, the ultimate arbiter of the laws is Beijing’s Standing Committee, which has shown an improved willingness in current years to wade into legal arguments and make pronouncements.
China’s state media have currently declared Lai guilty and produced clear authorities anticipate Hong Kong’s judges to side with Beijing on national safety.
Senior Chinese officials have lately backed calls to “reform” Hong Kong’s judiciary, one thing opponents worry signals help for a more mainland-style legal method that answers to the Communist Party and exactly where convictions are all but assured.
()