Search

The United Nations Sanctions Ordinance is the primary legal basis of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) for implementing the United Nations Security Council's resolutions. However, there are concerns that the Ordinance is potentially violating the separation of powers in its delegation of regulation-making authority to the executive. There are also criticisms against the expediency of the Ordinance as a mechanism lot enforcing Security Council sanctions. Against this background, this paper attempts to examine the separation of powers doctrine, its place in HKSAR's constitutional system and its relevance to the Ordinance. On the issue of expediency, this paper focuses on the scope and speed of implementing the sanctions, and the human rights and criminal justice pro blems it involves. For comparative purposes, references are to be made to the law of the USA, Canada and Singapore. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect has been in operation for more than a year. It is predictable that with the implementation of this scheme, cross-border securities disputes between the Mainland and Hong Kong will be on the rise. In resolving these disputes, one of the most important problems is the determination of substantive law that should apply to them. This paper makes feasible proposals to harmonize the choice of law rules regarding cross-border securities disputes under the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect with due reference made to the approaches adopted by the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Certain Rights in Respect of Securities Held with an Intermediary and the Uniform Commercial Code of the US. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper briefly reviews the change in the political status of Hong Kong from a British colony to a Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China, sets out the international rights and obligations of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) as evidence of its international legal personality, and discusses whether the HKSAR can be treated as a subject of international law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I shall essentially lay our five interpretive principles that the Hong Kong judiciary should observe. First. the Hong Kong judiciary can disable themselves from giving effect to National People's Congress (NPC) Acts that are inconsistent with the Basic Law. Second, the Court of Final Appeal has a duty to make a reference to the NPC's Standing Committee (NPCSC) when it needs to adjudicate over two conflicting Basic Law provisions, one whose affairs fall within the Central Government's concerns and the other which falls within the limits of Hong Kong's autonomy. Third, in reading the text of the NPCSC Interpretation narrowly while observing its central tenor, the Court would be respecting the plenary interpretive mandate conferred on the NPCSC while retaining its role as the primary interpreter of the Basic Law. Fourth, so far as a Mainland National Law has been formally incorporated into the Basic Law, it cannot be deemed in violation of another constitutional clause. Finally, I would argue that not all constitutional affairs falling within the limits of Hong Kong's autonomy are automatically justiciable; where there is a textual commitment to a coordinate branch of government, the Court may only interfere with the decisions made by the political branches on traditional grounds of judicial review, i.e. illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]