Some weeks ago China’s National People’s Congress Standing Commmittee ruled, at the invitation of local officials, that the city’s leader or an oversight committee has the power to decide whether an overseas lawyer can appear in a national security case.
This followed a spirited tussle in the courts here, in which the Department of Justice objected to Mr Lai’s plan to instruct a London-based barrister on his behalf. This bout went all the way to the Court of Final Appeal, where the department lost on the rather technical basis that it was seeking to advance arguments which it had not brought up in earlier hearings.
But these days any defeat in the courts for the government is temporary. If appeals fail it will change the law, either through the city’s Legislative Council or by seeking an “interpretation” from the NPC Standing Committee.
It is difficult to see why the government is so exercised over Mr Lai’s choice of counsel. His particular case does not, as far as we know, involve any state secrets which should not be shared with foreigners. It appears to centre round some very public expeditions to the USA.
It would be tempting to infer that the squabble is merely a continuation of the campaign to get at Mr Lai by any means available. If he wants something, it must be opposed as a matter of principle.
Read full article at
