Opinion | Why the proposed curb on overseas lawyers in national security cases is right for Hong Kong
- The proposed legal change is not a complete ban and lets the chief executive decide on exceptions
- This allows for the safeguarding of national security while preserving Hong Kong’s unique common law advantage and human rights
This proposal is in the best interests of Hong Kong. Let me explain why.
In law, context is everything. For now, an overseas lawyer (invariably a King’s Counsel from Britain) who is not qualified to practise in Hong Kong may apply for ad hoc admission to appear as a barrister in a case. The court allows this only if it is satisfied that it would be in the public interest. Among other things, the court will consider whether the case is of unusual difficulty or complexity, and whether any suitable local counsel is available.
The number of such applications has fallen over the years, with fewer than 20 in each of the last four years. This is hardly surprising given there are now more than 1,600 barristers (including more than 100 senior counsel) and 13,000 solicitors in Hong Kong.
Very few common law jurisdictions still retain such an arrangement. Moreover, it is unheard of to allow overseas lawyers to participate in litigation concerning national security.
This ad hoc admission arrangement was enacted long before Hong Kong’s national security law. It is completely silent on the crucial issue of whether overseas lawyers should be permitted to participate in cases involving national security.