Hong Kong Law Society president Ambrose Lam faces a vote of no confidence tomorrow night (Thursday) after he reportedly voiced support for a recently issued Beijing White Paper.

Around 7,000 Law Society members will vote at an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) called following several weeks of controversy over the comments.

Lam came under attack in June after he made positive comments on the white paper, which lawyers say has raised issues about Hong Kong's autonomy and judicial independence.

The white paper, issued in June, questioned the extent of Hong Kong's autonomy from mainland China and has created tension between the two.

Those eligible to vote at the EGM – including lawyers at international firms – will also decide on two other proposed resolutions: that the Law Society issue a statement supporting the rule of law and the independence of Hong Kong's judiciary; and that the president withdraw his statements on the white paper.

It is understood to be the first time a Hong Kong Law Society president has faced a no confidence vote.

"His views touched on the nerves of a lot of lawyers in Hong Kong," said one lawyer, who asked not to be named.

"[He is also being attacked] for commenting on political aspects when the Law Society as a matter of practice only comments on the legal points… and for bypassing the sub-committee and saying his own views without approval."

Opinion is strongly divided on the issue, with Facebook groups set up in support of and against the president.

In a letter published on the social networking site, Lam has defended himself by saying that he responded positively to what was a work report rather than a legal document, and that he "stood firm against the scare-mongers within [Hong Kong's] community who said that the White Paper changed or attempted to change Hong Kong's basic law".

But opponents say his words have "caused outrage in the legal community", and that the president had failed "to defend unambiguously" the rule of law "against any actual or potential threats" or "to follow internal due process when making comments on issues of public importance".

One International lawyer speaking to Legal Week said that some believe those who called the EGM were trying to "gag the Law Society" and "use it as a political vehicle" while others believe that those pushing the motion are looking to maintain the Law Society as a politically independent body.

"Lawyers should vote but not as a protest vote," said an international law firm partner, citing the argument made in an independent analysis from Dr Tim Summers, a senior consulting fellow at Chatham House.

"From that independent view, lawyers will realise that the resolutions sought are merely a political device and are not based in fact or merit. It is unfortunate that the good work of unpaid president Ambrose Lam is so readily ignored."

However, another partner said the president had been "surprisingly combative" and was wrong to express his views.

"The core values [of Hong Kong Basic Law] are regarded highly by practising lawyers and people in business and finance," he said.

"The objection expressed to the communications by the president is that they appeared supportive of the white paper's position that Hong Kong's judges, like public officials, would be required to 'love the motherland' and the concern is that this will erode the independence of the judiciary."

The results of the vote will be announced on Thursday evening at the EGM