ALN has joined with 74 other organizations to sign a joint letter urging Lord Neuberger to resign from the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal.  

You can read the full statement below and a pdf version here.  

45 civil society organisations urge Lord Neuberger to resign from Hong Kong Court

19 August 2024

Today, 45 civil society organisations from around the world sent a letter to Lord Neuberger, a former president of the British Supreme Court, urging him to seriously reconsider his position on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal. 

The letter follows Lord Neuberger being one of five judges who unanimously upheld the convictions of Jimmy Lai, Martin Lee, Margaret Ng, Albert Ho, Lee Cheuk-yan, “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung and Cyd Ho for “participating in an unauthorised demonstration” on 18 August 2019. The alleged unauthorised demonstration involved a peaceful march against the Hong Kong police’s use of force, which involved 1.7 million people marching without violent incident from Causeway Bay to Central.

In the letter, the civil society organisations emphasise that the “seven democrats would not be found guilty under other common law systems, including in Britain”, as the right to assemble is “guaranteed under Hong Kong’s Basic Law, and Hong Kong’s obligations under international law”.

The organisations also call attention to how in the 76-page judgement, Lord Neuberger was “not eager to provide any dissenting opinion to emphasise the importance of free peaceful assembly and free speech in Hong Kong”. Lord Neuberger also failed to warn against the Public Order Ordinance, the local criminal law centred in this case, which has been widely weaponised by the authorities to crack down on free peaceful assembly and thousands of protestors in 2019. Both of these actions contradict Lord Neuberger’s previous effort in advocating free speech in his book, Freedom of Speech in International Law.

Given that Lord Neuberger’s involvement in the Hong Kong Court opens him to credible charges of sponsoring a systematic repression of human rights against peaceful activists in the city, the organisations implore Lord Neuberger “to immediately follow the example of your British and other foreign colleagues who have decided to step down from the Hong Kong courts”.

The civil society organisations await a reply. 

The full letter can be read below and here.

45個民間組織聯署促請廖柏嘉勳爵辭任香港終審法院非常任法官

今天，45個來自世界各地的民間組織聯署致函前英國最高法院院長廖柏嘉勳爵（Lord Neuberger），促請他嚴正重新考慮在香港終審法院的職位。

2019年8月18日，現已解散的民陣在維園舉行「流水式集會」，事後黎智英、李柱銘、吳靄儀、何俊仁、李卓人、梁國雄和何秀蘭被裁定「組織未經批准集結」和「參與未經批准集結」兩罪成立。七名民主派人士上訴後獲撤銷「組織集結」定罪，另就「參與集結」定罪提出終極上訴，五名終審法院法官上週一（12日）一致裁定駁回上訴，維持原判。廖柏嘉勳爵是五名法官之一 。

相關民間組織在信中強調，「根據其他普通法制度（包括英國在內），七名民主派人士不會被判有罪」，因集會權利「受《香港基本法》和香港在國際法下的義務保障」。

聯署組織同時指出，廖柏嘉勳爵在長達76頁的判詞中，「並不熱切提供任何反對意見，藉以強調香港自由和平集會和言論自由的重要性」。本案圍繞的香港刑事法《公安條例》廣被當局用作武器，打壓2019年的自由和平集會和數千名示威者，廖柏嘉勳爵亦沒就此提出告誡。廖柏嘉勳爵之前在其著作《Freedom of Speech in International Law》中倡議言論自由，上述兩項行為均與此有矛盾。

鑒於廖柏嘉勳爵任職香港法院，有助長以體系鎮壓香港和平社運人士的人權之嫌，聯署組織請求廖柏嘉勳爵「立即效法相關英籍及其他外籍法官同僚，辭去香港法院職務」 。

相關民間組織正等候答覆。

信函全文可在此處閱讀。

__________

Joint statement from NGOs on Lord Neuberger’s role on the Hong Kong court

Dear Lord Neuberger,

In light of your former position as President of the British Supreme Court, we, the undersigned, urge you to seriously reconsider your position on the Hong Kong court, following the denied appeals of the convictions of Jimmy Lai, Martin Lee, Margaret Ng, Albert Ho, Lee Cheuk-yan, “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung and Cyd Ho.

These seven democrats would not be found guilty under other common law systems, including in Britain, for partaking in their right to assembly during a peaceful march in 2019. This is a right guaranteed under Hong Kong’s Basic Law, and Hong Kong’s obligations under international law.

As one of five judges ruling in this case, you will know that the defence cited two UK Supreme Court decisions on the proportionate restriction of fundamental rights. However, these citations were rejected by the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, on the grounds that “UK cases should not be followed in Hong Kong”. As a former British judge, it is crucial to consider how to balance this rejection with your publicly stated intention to sit for “as long as I can do good by being there”.

There were also legal technical viewpoints to justify the rejection of appeal in the 76-page judgement, in which you unreservedly agree with the fellow Hong Kong judges. That said, the bigger picture demonstrates that the Public Order Ordinance, the local criminal law centred in this case, has been widely weaponised by the authorities to crack down on free peaceful assembly and thousands of protestors in 2019. In your opinion in the judgement, you have not spoken against the greater evil of the Public Order Ordinance. You were not eager to provide any dissenting opinion to emphasise the importance of free peaceful assembly and free speech in Hong Kong as a repressive jurisdiction nowadays. This does not appear to be consistent with your previous effort in advocating free speech and press freedom, as you highlighted in the promotion of your book Freedom of Speech in International Law.

Serving as a non-permanent judge in Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal was appreciated as performing the function of a watchdog of the local court to warrant public confidence in light of Hong Kong’s “one country, two systems” formula under the shadow of China. Nevertheless, your involvement and judgement in this case not only appear to window-dress the government suppression of pro-democracy activists and a media publisher, but further legitimise their crackdown with your authority and fame.

Under the Guide to Judicial Conduct in the United Kingdom, “Retired judicial office holders may still be regarded by the general public as representatives of the judiciary. They should exercise caution and are encouraged therefore to refer to this guidance so as to avoid any activity that may tarnish the reputation of the judiciary.” (p.6)

Given that your involvement in the Hong Kong court is in effect sponsoring a systematic repression of human rights against peaceful activists and journalists in the city, we are deeply concerned that your continuation of service in Hong Kong is further tarnishing the reputation of the British judiciary.

We implore you to immediately follow the example of your British and other foreign colleagues who have decided to step down from the Hong Kong courts. In an environment where business is far from usual, you must not contribute to the rapid deterioration of fundamental rights and freedoms, no matter the payout.

Judges from democratic, rule of law countries should not be lending prestige to the rapidly deteriorating justice system in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong government, under direction from Beijing, has lost its legitimacy. We urge you to do the right thing and reconsider your position on the Hong Kong court.

Yours sincerely,

Signatories in alphabetical order

Action Free Hong Kong Montreal 

AHKF (AfricaHongKongFrance)

ARTICLE 19

Adelaide Stand with Hong Kong

Asian Lawyers Network (ALN)

Assembly of Citizens’ Representatives, Hong Kong

Association of Hong Kongers in Western Australia

Australia Hong Kong Link

Australia Capital Hong Kong Association

Australia Hong Kong Link NSW Chapter

Befria Hongkong (Sweden)

Bonham Tree Aid

Canadian Friends of Hong Kong

Canada-Hong Kong Link

Coalition of Students Resisting the CCP

Committee to Protect Journalists

DC4HK (Washingtonians Supporting Hong Kong)

Democracy for Hong Kong (D4HK)

Freiheit für Hongkong e.V.

Hongkongers in Britain (HKB)

Hongkonger in Deutschland e.V. (HKDE)

Hong Kong Centre for Human Rights

Hong Kong Committee in Norway

Hong Kong International Alliance Brisbane (HKIA Brisbane)

Hong Kong Labour Rights Monitor

Hong Kong Liberty

Hong Kong Watch

Hong Kongers in San Francisco Bay Area

Human Rights in China

Le Comité pour la Liberté à Hong-Kong

Manchester Stands With Hong Kong

Netherlands for Hong Kong

NGO DEI

Northern California Hong Kong Club

Nottingham Stands with Hong Kong

Reading UK Stands With Hong Kong

RTYC Toronto, Canada

Safeguard Defenders

Scottish Hongkongers

Southampton HongKongers

The 29 Principles

Toronto Association for Democracy in China

Trafford Hongkongers CIC

Uyghur Rights Advocacy Project

Victoria HongKongers Association (Australia)