Lawyers March as Hong Kong Stands in Defiance of China Extradition Law
The proposed law, which would allow China to extradite individuals from Hong Kong, has increased fears that China is gradually eroding Hong Kong's freedoms and independence.
June 10, 2019 at 12:24 PM
4 minute read
Tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets in Hong Kong Wednesday, surrounding the city's Legislative Council in an effort to stop proposed legislation that would allow extraditions to mainland China.
Protesters were met with tear gas and rubber bullets as they expressed anger over China's growing influence and fear that liberties in the territory were eroding. The clashes followed earlier protests on Sunday, when more than 1 million people in Hong Kong took to the streets to protest the extradition law. And that massive demonstration came as local lawyers in the city expressed concern over the upcoming amendments to a law that predated Hong Kong's 1997 handover to China.
Last week, members of Hong Kong's legal profession, including barristers, solicitors, judges and law students, staged a silent march from the Court of Final Appeal, Hong Kong's top court, to the government's headquarters. Global law firms did not participate. Organisers of the march said an estimated 2,500 to 3,000 people participated in the walkout. The police put the number at 880.
Lawyers, all dressed in black, marched in protest against the government's proposal to change Hong Kong's existing law to allow fugitive extradition to mainland China, where lawyers fear due process and rule of law is not upheld.
Hong Kong's current extradition regime includes mutual agreements with 20 jurisdictions including the United States, but the existing law does not include an agreement with China, which assumed sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997. Hong Kong operates as a special administrative region under the "one country, two systems" doctrine, which allows the territory to keep its common law legal system, independent from the rest of China.
The proposed amendments were prompted by the murder of a Hong Kong woman in Taiwan, with which Hong Kong also does not have an extradition agreement. The murderer, who is now in Hong Kong's custody, cannot be extradited to Taiwan or charged in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Government, led by chief executive Carrie Lam, proposed a change to the current law to allow Hong Kong to process extradition requests, such as that in the Taiwan murder case, on a case-by-case basis with jurisdictions with which it does not have a mutual agreement.
The proposal, which is now before the city's legislature for a second reading, drew a significant backlash from all corners of Hong Kong's civil society, including the legal sector. Last week, the Law Society of Hong Kong, the city's professional body for solicitors, released a statement calling for the government to halt a vote on the bill, and consult with more stakeholders about the amendments' far-reaching and important implications.
The Hong Kong Bar Association also does not support the proposed amendments, citing concerns over "significant differences between the judicial and criminal justice systems practised in Hong Kong and the mainland, in terms of protection of fundamental human rights."
The marching lawyers, led by many of Hong Kong's prominent barristers and politicians, shared similar concerns over the mainland's lack of judicial independence and said that agreeing to turn people over from Hong Kong undermines the territory's rule of law.
The legal sector was joined on Sunday by regular Hong Kong citizens, who marched for hours in scorching heat, opposing the idea of a China extradition treaty. Police reported 270,000 people attended the rally, while organisers claimed it drew 1.03 million protesters. The turnout at Sunday's demonstration well exceeded that of the 2003 mass protest against the then-proposed amendment to Hong Kong's Basic Law, the city's de facto constitution. The proposed anti-subversion law, known as Article 23, was shelved after it was met with severe opposition.
Lam's administration was unswayed by Sunday's protest, insisting on proceeding with the bill's second reading on Wednesday. But because protesters surrounded the complex and blocked traffic during the massive protest on Wednesday, many of the city's lawmakers were unable to reach Hong Kong's Legislative Council for the scheduled debate. The council later said the debate was postponed until further notice.
|Related Stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGibson Dunn Sued by Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Australian Corporations More Concerned About Class Actions Risk, HSF Report Finds
3 minute readSingapore Oil Tycoon Appeals 17.5 Year Prison Sentence In Fraudulent Trading Case
Charles Russell Speechlys Opens in Milan to Focus on Ultra-High Net Worth Clients
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250