Search

Legal mobilization has not occurred in every authoritarian political system. However, it happened in Hong Kong after China resumed its sovereignty in July 1997. This book manuscript, revised from my doctoral dissertation, examines why and how legal mobilization developed in Hong Kong during the process of the sovereignty transition from Britain to China and intensified after Beijing resumed its sovereignty over the city in July 1997. Specifically, this book manuscript addresses the following issues: the conditions under which legal mobilization happens in authoritarian regimes; the ways in which social actors use the courts to pursue their interests; and the political origin of the emergence of cause lawyering. This study adopts historical institutionalism, particularly two of its building blocks, the concepts of critical antecedent and critical juncture, as the analytical framework to explain the rise of legal mobilization in post-colonial Hong Kong. I argue that the processes of the sovereignty transition resulted in a critical juncture during which a new legal opportunity structure was created and the legislature was weakened. On the one hand, the implementation of the Bill of Rights and the Basic Law together with the establishment of a new final appellant court located in Hong Kong, created new legal opportunities for individuals to use the courts to advance their interests. On the other hand, Beijing and the post-colonial Hong Kong administration tightened the political opportunities available to pro-democracy politicians and civil society, by weakening the legislature and marginalizing their political influence in the legislature. These shifting political opportunities from the legislature to the judicial branch, combined with the historical legacies of a legal complex (consists of an independent and competent judiciary, an autonomous and organized legal profession, and government-funded legal aid), and the agency of cause lawyers and rights advocacy groups, contributed to the rise of legal mobilization. This project adopted both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Quantitative analysis of changes in the judiciary's agenda during the period 1981-2008 was conducted to document the patterns and trends of legal mobilization. In addition to quantitative studies, between 2006 and 2008, I undertook semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 25 rights advocacy leaders and 17 cause lawyers, who launched and represented crucial litigation against the government. Additionally, I interviewed five senior government officials, three judges, and three lawyers. This study makes three theoretical and comparative contributions. First, it engages and contributes to the emerging literature on the judicial politics under authoritarianism. It argues that historical legacies play an important role in the rise of legal mobilization and that legal mobilization in authoritarian regimes by no means unfolds as political authorities would wish. Second, it highlights the impact of different forms of authoritarianism on the modes of opposition mobilization. Third, through analyzing how the strength of capitalism (e.g., economic pressure) has posed substantial difficulty to cause lawyering work in Hong Kong, this study informs the literature on economic modernization and democratization, especially the role of the middle class. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What roles can liberal cause lawyers play in defending and promoting civil liberties and democracy in an semi-authoritarian regime? What are the opportunities and constraints of engaging in liberal cause lawyering in an semi-authoritarian regime? In thinking about these questions, this paper examines Hong Kong. Hong Kong provides a natural experiment - an existing court with independent powers in a political system in which sovereignty was transferred from Britain to China a decade ago. Since the change in the sovereignty, Hong Kong has witnessed a dramatic rise of legal mobilization. Citizens and social groups are increasingly going to the courts to challenge the Hong Kong government. A group of liberal cause lawyers have played a critical role in the processes, as they have represented the litigants in the majority of civil rights and public policy litigation in the appellant courts.This paper studies the rise of liberal cause lawyering in post-colonial Hong Kong, including their origins, roles, opportunities, constraints and impact. It argues that these liberal cause lawyers have played an important but under-studied role in promoting and sustaining the rule of law in Hong Kong. The paper is primarily based on the author's interviews with liberal cause lawyers, rights advocacy organizations and government officials. I will also draw data from local newspapers, magazines and books. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the major factors behind the rise of legal mobilization against the post-colonial Hong Kong government. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]