<![CDATA[Extraditions from Hong Kong to rest of China violate Basic Law, argue lawyers for fugitive tycoon Joseph Lau in judicial review]>
A convicted billionaire looking to avoid rendition to Macau under a controversial Hong Kong government extradition plan will argue that the proposed new law would violate the city's mini-constitution.
Lawyers for Joseph Lau Luen-hung say excluding the rest of China from local extradition law is a core part of the principles under which the city is governed.
That was one of a set of new arguments submitted to the High Court last week in amendments to Joseph Lau Luen-hung's application for a judicial review of proposed legal changes which would allow the handover of fugitives to any jurisdiction the city has no extradition deal with " including mainland China and the former Portuguese enclave.
The proposal has already met firm resistance elsewhere, with pan-democrats, legal experts and some business leaders saying it could lead to Hongkongers being prosecuted for political reasons on the mainland.
He has since then resided in Hong Kong, which left him immune from any threat extradition until the recent proposal emerged.
The fresh grounds put forward included an argument that the exclusion of "the rest of the People's Republic of China" from the extradition laws formed a core part of the "one country, two systems" principle, under which the central government rules the city but promises it a high degree of autonomy.
City chief stakes credibility on extradition bill " but impasse continues
The lawyers argue the exclusion ensures Hong Kong residents cannot be subject to the criminal law of the rest of China. They asked the court to declare that any decision to repeal the exclusion would violate the rights protected by Article 38 of the Basic Law, which states that Hong Kong residents shall enjoy the other rights and freedoms safeguarded by the laws of Hong Kong.
They also argue that the city government cannot surrender anyone to other parts of China unless it can prove that all the courts in China abide by the rule of law, and respect human rights and standards of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The potential for the law to have retroactive effect is something else they will take issue with.
Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng Yeuk-wah speaks to the press on the proposed new extradition laws at the Legislative Council Complex in Tamar in April. Photo: Dickson Lee
The Post understands that Lau's lawyers applied for David Pannick, a British QC who has represented the Hong Kong government in a number of high-profile constitutional cases, to join their team.
But both Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng Yeuk-wah and the Hong Kong Bar Association oppose Pannick's admission. The Department of Justice and the association declined to explain the reasons for their opposition, citing ongoing legal proceedings.
A High Court hearing is scheduled for May 23 to discuss the admission of Pannick, who already helped in the drafting of the new arguments.
China's rule of law has not come far enough to reassure Hongkongers
The hearing for Lau's judicial review application is scheduled for June 21.
Lau, the former chairman of Chinese Estates Holdings, dropped a bombshell in April by lodging a judicial review of the planned amendments to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, which has since then caused gridlock " and scuffles " in the legislature.
In their first submission to the court last month, his legal team, led by Gerard McCoy SC and Robert Pang SC, asked the court to declare that surrendering Lau to Macau would violate the Bill of Rights, the local legislation that transposed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a UN human rights treaty.
They claimed Lau's trial in Macau was "marred by ... serious procedural irregularities that rendered the trial incompatible with internationally mandated standards of fairness".
This article originally appeared on the South China Morning Post (SCMP).
Copyright (c) 2019. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.
