Thread by @XinqiSu

#NOW HK Chief Justice Andrew Cheung is delivering his speech for ceremonial opening of the legal year 2023. His speech will devote to “role of the judiciary” - “an inaccurate, incomplete or misconceived understanding of the role of the Judiciary is often the reason…

…an inaccurate, incomplete or misconceived understanding of the role of the Judiciary is often the reason for misplaced or inappropriate criticisms of court decisions, or even personal attacks against our judges,” Cheung said.

“It is …entirely proper for someone, if there are good grounds, to criticise the court or a judge for misapplying the law. It is, however, wrong to criticise a judge simply for applying laws which one does not like or agree with…laws are not enacted by judges”

“Many legal disputes in public law cases…concern rights or interests that pull in opposite or even multiple directions. The court has to put all these rights and interests in the balancing scales…The outcome …may not always be pleasing to everyone, or even anyone.”

“When fundamental rights are restricted by law that is binding on the court, or law that is put beyond the court's jurisdiction to review, the court must take the law as it is and accept the limit of its jurisdiction, and administer justice accordingly.”

“The courts' lawmaking role should not be exaggerated…What the court cannot do is to use this as an opportunity for legislating or, put another way, filling in a perceived legislative gap. That is not the function of the courts, but that of the Legislature.”

“Whilst inevitably, the court's decision may sometimes have a political impact, this does not mean the court has made a political decision, or made its decision on a political basis as opposed to a legal one when deciding the dispute. “

“Where a jurisdiction does not have a written constitution and the legislature is supreme, it is not for the courts to challenge what the legislature has chosen to enact, and the jurisdiction of the courts is ultimately a matter for the legislature to decide.”

Following the Chief Justice, Secretary of Justice Paul Lam took the stand and began to deliver his speech, which refuted “suggestions that (the recent NPCSC interpretation of #NSL) …even putting the Chief Executive and the Committee above the law.”

“Such suggestions are plainly wrong and misconceived. The Interpretation is, by definition, a clarification of the original intent and purpose of those provisions; it does not confer any new power on anyone,” SJ Lam said.

“(The interpretation is) entirely consistent with the well-established common law principle that, on matters concerning national security, it shall be for the executive authorities, rather than the judiciary, to decide and have the final say.”

“Not only that the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, being the executive authorities of the Region, will not interfere with the Judiciary …it has also been taking proactive steps to defend the Judiciary.”

“…the rule of law cannot be safeguarded by judges and legal professionals alone. If you do care about and love Hong Kong, which I am sure you do, I would urge you to show and give us your support and understanding,” HK SJ Paul Lam appealed to the public.