Editorial | Judgments reflect the independence and impartiality of Hong Kong’s courts

Beijing’s passing of a national security law for Hong Kong in 2020 established new crimes, institutions and procedures.

Five years on, with many cases proceeding, the implementation of the law is still at a relatively early stage. Lessons can be learned and improvements made.

The Court of Final Appeal highlighted one area deserving attention last week. Three former senior members of the now-disbanded Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China won their appeals against conviction.

They had been found guilty of failing to comply with a police order to supply information about the organisation as part of an investigation. They were each sentenced to 4½ months in jail.

The top court quashed their convictions, finding there to have been a miscarriage of justice. Chow Hang-tung, Tsui Hon-kwong and Tang Ngok-kwan had received the order to provide information, including details of members, donors, financial records and activities, on the basis that the police commissioner “reasonably believed” the organisation to be a foreign agent.

But the court held reasonable belief was not enough. This approach, not needing court approval, required proof the group was a foreign agent. Without it, the order was invalid.

The five judges also took issue with the redacting of much of the material the authorities relied on in the case.