Edward Lang Yiu (Edward Liu is qualified as a solicitor of England & Wales as well as a lawyer of the People’s Republic of China. He is also a registered foreign lawyer practising in Hong Kong.) writes
- Attacks over the new security law are starting to target Hong Kong’s legal industry, challenging Hong Kong’s place as a seat of international arbitration
- Singapore’s example shows a strict legal code to uphold national security and robust courts that respect the rule of law are not mutually exclusive
A recent article in the Financial Times, titled “Companies consider writing Hong Kong out of legal contracts” has caused a stir in the Hong Kong legal industry.The article quoted senior lawyers from 10 large law firms in Hong Kong, Tokyo and Singapore, stating that companies from the United States and Japan were concerned mainland Chinese policies would jeopardise Hong Kong’s rule of lawThus, they considered switching their choice for seat of arbitration from Hong Kong to Singapore in their arbitration clauses.
However, there is no clear evidence in the article that foreign companies amended their contracts over such concerns. It was merely a rise in consultations from clients in this regard.
It is not uncommon for the media to belittle Hong Kong since the social unrest of 2019 and the implementation of the national security law in 2020. An American Chamber of Commerce survey in June 2020 said around 30 to 40 per cent of American businesses and expats.
But what is the current status? In January, new AmCham chairwoman Jessica Bartlett said the organisation had not seen large capital withdrawals after the national security law took effect and investors still had confidence in the Hong Kong market.
