大律師公會前主席夏博義,首次披露接受國安處警誡會面後離港原因|Paul Harris reveals for the first time the reason for leaving HK.
Summary
TLDRIn this insightful interview, Paul Harris, former chair of the Hong Kong Bar Council, discusses his abrupt departure from Hong Kong in 2022 after being accused of sedition by the National Security Police. Harris, who left amidst an ongoing case, reflects on the state of the rule of law in Hong Kong, distinguishing between civil and political cases, and shares his views on the diminishing independence of Hong Kong's judiciary. He also touches on the international implications and the British political landscape's awareness of Hong Kong's situation.
Takeaways
- 🏛 Paul Harris, a prominent lawyer from Hong Kong and former chair of the Hong Kong Bar Council, was forced to leave Hong Kong in March 2022 due to accusations of sedition by the Hong Kong National Security Police.
- 📚 Harris had to abandon his ongoing cases, including representing Helena Wong and lamu Ting in the Democratic 47 case, after receiving a tip-off that Beijing had ordered his arrest.
- 🗣️ Harris was questioned by the security police about statements he made in his book and on Twitter, which they considered seditious, but he was not charged and was allowed to leave Hong Kong.
- 🌏 Harris moved to the UK and is now standing for office as a Liberal Democrat candidate, aiming to raise awareness about the situation in Hong Kong.
- 🤔 The interview discusses the current state of the rule of law in Hong Kong, with Harris suggesting that while civil and non-political cases may still be tried fairly, political cases and freedom of speech are under siege.
- 📉 Harris believes that the presence of foreign judges in Hong Kong contributes positively to the rule of law and that their departure would be a significant step towards a totalitarian state.
- 😔 There is a perceived lack of interest and awareness about Hong Kong in the UK, which Harris finds disappointing, especially considering the potential impact on British foreign policy.
- 🗳️ The Liberal Democrats have shown more concern for Hong Kong than other major parties, but Harris acknowledges the challenges in making Hong Kong a high priority issue in British politics.
- 🔗 Harris suggests that linking the observance of the Joint Declaration in Hong Kong to other issues involving China could be a more effective approach in British foreign policy.
- 🏛️ The interview takes place outside Dy Street Chambers, known for its human rights law practice and notable members such as the potential future Prime Minister of Britain.
- 📈 The conversation highlights the ongoing international tension and the challenges faced by judges in Hong Kong who are trying to uphold justice amidst political pressures.
Q & A
What is the significance of Dy Street Chambers in the context of the video?
-Dy Street Chambers is a well-known institution in Britain, particularly famous for its human rights law practice. It is also the workplace of K stama, a prominent figure likely to become Britain's prime minister, and the location where Paul Harris, a prominent lawyer, worked before he had to leave Hong Kong.
Why did Paul Harris have to leave Hong Kong?
-Paul Harris had to leave Hong Kong under duress after being accused of sedition by the Hong Kong National Security Police. He received a tip-off that Beijing had ordered his arrest, prompting him to leave the city.
What was the reason behind Paul Harris's initial move to Hong Kong in 1994?
-Paul Harris moved to Hong Kong after being asked to set up an independent watchdog to ensure the promises in the joint declaration were kept, focusing on the rule of law and human rights in the city.
How did Paul Harris's work in Hong Kong differ from his previous work in London?
-In London, Paul Harris was involved in a general civil practice with no human rights work, whereas in Hong Kong, he was able to focus on human rights law due to the city's Bill of Rights and the many cases that arose from it.
What was the nature of the case that prevented Paul Harris from leaving Hong Kong immediately?
-Paul Harris was involved in a significant ongoing personal injury case that he had to finish before he could leave Hong Kong.
What were the two main reasons the Hong Kong National Security Police considered Paul Harris's actions as seditious?
-The two reasons were a statement in his book about people demonstrating against the Fugitive Offenders bill due to concerns about fair trials in China, and a tweet he posted stating that Hong Kong had become a police state, which they interpreted as stirring up hostility towards China.
How did Paul Harris feel about the situation in Hong Kong regarding the rule of law after his departure?
-Paul Harris believes that while the rule of law is still present in non-political civil cases, it is under siege in areas related to political crimes and free speech, with the National Security Law being used to suppress normal debate and criticism.
What was the impact of foreign judges resigning from the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal on the rule of law in Hong Kong?
-The resignation of foreign judges, who were of high caliber and contributed positively to the rule of law, could potentially lead to a further deterioration of the legal system and move Hong Kong closer to a totalitarian state.
What is Paul Harris's view on the role of foreign judges in maintaining the rule of law in Hong Kong?
-Paul Harris believes that foreign judges can make a positive contribution to the rule of law in Hong Kong and that their presence can assist local judges through their high standard of legal reasoning.
How does Paul Harris perceive the level of awareness and interest in Hong Kong issues within British politics?
-He finds the level of awareness and interest in Hong Kong issues to be disappointingly low, with the Liberal Democrats showing more concern than other parties, but still not making it a high priority in British foreign policy.
What is Paul Harris's stance on the potential impact of foreign judges leaving the Hong Kong judiciary?
-He believes that their departure would be a significant step towards a totalitarian state and would harm the legal system, emphasizing that once they leave, they are unlikely to return.
Outlines
🏢 Introduction to Dy Street Chambers and Paul Harris's Background
This paragraph introduces the setting of Dy Street Chambers, a renowned human rights law practice in Britain, and mentions key figures such as the defense team for Jimy Li and the potential future Prime Minister, K Stama. The main focus, however, is on Paul Harris, former chair of the Hong Kong Bar Council, who had to flee under duress due to accusations of sedition by the Hong Kong National Security Police. The speaker plans to interview Harris about his departure from Hong Kong in March 2022 following a tip-off about his impending arrest.
📚 Paul Harris's Departure from Hong Kong and His Initial Involvement
Paul Harris discusses the circumstances that led to his departure from Hong Kong in 2022, including the secret tip that prompted his exit. He details the abrupt end to his legal work, including high-profile cases, and the precautions he took to ensure his son's future education. Harris also recounts his experience of being called in for a formal interview by the security police, where he was considered for charges of sedition due to statements made in his book and a tweet about Hong Kong becoming a police state. Despite expecting detention, he was released after two hours, prompting an immediate departure from Hong Kong.
🌏 Paul Harris's Journey to Hong Kong and Early Years
The narrative shifts to Harris's initial move to Hong Kong in 1994, motivated by his role as the first chairman of the English Bar's Human Rights Committee. He was invited to Hong Kong to establish an independent watchdog to ensure the preservation of the rule of law post the 1997 Handover. Harris transitioned from a general civil practice in London to focusing on human rights in Hong Kong, setting up the Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor and engaging in a broader legal practice due to the less specialized legal field in Hong Kong.
🏛️ The Erosion of Rule of Law in Hong Kong
Harris reflects on his early optimism about the rule of law in Hong Kong post-Handover and acknowledges the significant changes and challenges that have arisen since, particularly after 2014. He differentiates between non-political cases, where the rule of law still appears to function independently, and political cases, which have seen a marked deterioration in judicial independence. Harris cites examples of the suppression of free speech and criticism through the use of sedition charges, highlighting the case of speech therapists prosecuted for a children's book perceived as satirical.
🗳️ Political Aspirations and the Role of Foreign Judges
Harris shares his views on the resignation of foreign judges from Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal and expresses his belief that their presence is beneficial to the local judiciary. He discusses the international tensions resulting from these resignations and the impact on the rule of law. Harris also touches on his own political aspirations as a Liberal Democrat candidate, the party's stance on Hong Kong, and the broader British political landscape's lack of focus on Hong Kong issues, expressing disappointment in the major parties' approach to China and Hong Kong policy.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Green Beans Media
💡Dy Street Chambers
💡Human Rights Law
💡Jimy Li
💡K Stama
💡Paul Harris
💡Sedition
💡Hong Kong Bar Council
💡Rule of Law
💡National Security Law
💡Democratic 47 Case
Highlights
Introduction to Green Beans Media and Dy Street Chambers, a renowned human rights law practice in Britain.
Paul Harris, former chair of the Hong Kong Bar Council, discusses his departure from Hong Kong due to accusations of sedition.
Harris received a tip-off that Beijing had ordered his arrest, prompting his departure.
Harris had to give up representing clients, including in the Democratic 47 case, before leaving Hong Kong.
He was summoned by the security police for an interview about potential sedition charges.
Harris believed his statements about Hong Kong's inability to have fair trials and his tweet about Hong Kong becoming a police state were considered seditious.
Despite expecting to be detained indefinitely, Harris was released after a two-hour interview without charges.
Harris' immediate departure from Hong Kong after his release, including the last-minute flight to Istanbul.
Harris' initial move to Hong Kong in 1994 to establish an independent watchdog for human rights.
His general civil practice in London before focusing on human rights in Hong Kong.
Harris' optimism about the rule of law in Hong Kong post-Handover and its subsequent deterioration.
Harris' view on the current state of the rule of law in Hong Kong, distinguishing between non-political and political cases.
The impact of foreign judges on the Hong Kong judiciary and the controversy surrounding their resignation.
Harris' perspective on the importance of foreign judges in maintaining the rule of law in Hong Kong.
The lack of awareness and interest in Hong Kong's situation within the UK and the role of political parties.
Harris' political aspirations as a Liberal Democrat candidate and the party's stance on Hong Kong.
The need for a more integrated approach to foreign policy, linking Hong Kong's situation with broader China-UK relations.
Transcripts
hello and welcome to green beans media
we're here standing outside the office
of the Dy Street Chambers this is a very
well-known institution it's probably
Britain's most famous human rights law
practice among its members are the main
part of the team who are defending jimy
Li in his international team in the
current court trial and perhaps more
famously it's the the home of uh K stama
who is more than likely to become
Britain's prime minister he works in
these Chambers but we're not coming here
to see K starma we are in fact here to
see Paul Harris who was chair of the
Hong Kong Bar Council very prominent
lawyer in Hong Kong who had to leave
under great duress after being accused
of sedition by the Hong Kong National
Security Police so I'm going to go
inside and we'll have a few interesting
words with
him hello Steve hi Paul nice to see you
very good to see you
too h
l following you behind
[Music]
carefully here we are
[Music]
Paul Harris you you you left uh Hong
Kong about what two and a half three
years ago what were the circumstances in
which you felt obliged to leave I left
in March
2022 I finished my term as chair of the
Hong Kong bar in January
2022 and I received um
information uh via a secret Channel a
tip off that I had to leave because
Beijing had ordered my
arrest and when I got that information I
knew I had to go and I sold my car I
gave up the lease on my flat and I had
to return uh my briefs including
representing Helena Wong and lamu Ting
in the Democratic 47 case so they were
deprived of their Barrister and I got
ready to go I couldn't go at once
because I had a big ongoing case a
personal injury case and I planned to
leave around the 6th of March on the
28th of February the security police
rang me and said we want to interview
you please come to the security police
headquarters tomorrow morning I thought
at that point that I was going to be
detained
indefinitely I moved money around to
make sure my son's school fees could be
paid even if I was in prison and I told
a few people who needed to know what I
thought was going to happen to me and I
arranged for two lawyers to come with me
not because I didn't know the law but
because I wanted people to know I'd gone
in if I didn't come
out we went along to Wai to the police
headquarters and I was told told this is
a formal interview under caution we are
considering charging you with
sedition and it was a video recorded
interview under caution and there seemed
to be two things that they considered
were
seditious one was that in my book my
worldwide history of Street
demonstrations uh which finishes with a
chapter about Hong Kong I had said that
people demonstrated Against The Fugitive
offenders bill because they didn't want
to be extradited to China because they
couldn't get a fair trial there and that
statement they considered to be
seditious in the sense of stirring up
hostility to China to want to overthrow
the regime that's what sedition
means and the other one was that I when
the national
security law was
imposed I before that I used to tweet on
Twitter and I sent a tweet saying I'm
not tweeting anymore because Hong Kong's
become a police state and saying that
was also going to be sedition and I
definitely did say those things and I
make no apology for saying them uh they
are not sedition in any civilized
country um I was not expecting to be let
out I had a prison pack I had a
toothbrush and change of clothes and so
on but after about 2 hours uh the
officer said uh well those are all my
questions you're free to go so you so
you weren't actually charged at that
point I wasn't charged no and I said
well I'm planning to travel in the next
few days am I free to leave Hong Kong
the officer said at this moment you
are and I came out I looked at my two
friends they said you've got to go this
minute I went and saw my junior in my
personal injury case which still had one
day of hearing but video hearing and she
said you've got to go this is more
important than your duty to the court I
went home I packed two suitcases went to
the
airport um my ex-wife and my son came to
see me off at the airport and I got the
last seat on a flight to
Istanbul and I didn't know whether I'd
be able to leave until the plane took
off
[Music]
do you want to be back to
home
or uh
[Music]
Hong
um
or uh so
[Music]
or uh
[Music]
[Music]
and let me just roll back quite a bit
because you came to Hong Kong I think it
is in
1994 what made you do that
I was the first chairman of the English
bars human rights committee it's a
long-established institution with its
own budget its semi-autonomous from the
bar and we decided to just concentrate
on helping judges and lawyers who were
being persecuted for doing an honest job
or who might be persecuted for doing an
honest job and one thing was Hong Kong
1997 can we do anything to make the rule
of law survive and while I was chairman
of the bar human rights committee Martin
Lee and sitto came to see me in London
and uh said expressed their concern so I
did a a mission to Hong Kong in
1993 and a lot of people said we need
this independent Watchdog to make sure
the promises in the joint declaration
are kept and then someone said why don't
you come here and set it up you set up
that Committee in London you you've got
form you know for setting up this kind
of thing
and I didn't immediately say yes but I
thought about it and eventually that's
what I did and that was how I came to
Hong Kong so when you came to Hong Kong
you
were just doing human rights type of law
or or general practice not at all in
London I was doing a general civil
practice with no human rights work my
work on the bar human rights committee
was like a second unpaid job um
and I realized if I went to Hong Kong I
could do human rights work because Hong
Kong had a Bill of Rights which was new
then and people were working out what it
meant and there were a lot of cases and
so when I came to Hong Kong I did a lot
of that but I did a lot of other things
too because Hong Kong's not so
specialized and I did set up the
independent Watchdog which was Hong Kong
human rights monitor Hong yankun gamat
[Music]
[Music]
uh
[Music]
[Music]
so you you've been in Hong Kong you were
there just before the Handover you were
there
in the early years of um the resumption
of
sovereignty did you that time think that
the rule of law could be maintained yes
I did there was uh quite a lot of
optimism in the first years after the
Handover because before the Handover
there were a lot of pessimists and a lot
of frightened people people saying you
know you you're going to prison as soon
as the Handover happens and uh you know
or you'll be chucked out and uh this
joint declaration it won't last 6 months
it's just a fig Leaf to allow Britain to
get out I didn't think
so
and for really up
until at least
2014 there was a feeling Hong Kong's got
its own system the system is stable it
does have the rule of law it doesn't
have full democracy but it does have
free speech
and there was a feeling that could
continue
indefinitely and now here we are um you
you left is there such a thing as rule
of law in Hong Kong in your
opinion in some areas I think if you
have a non-political type of case
particularly a civil case there Pro
there is rule of law that I think is
still there so your view of the current
situation is that if you separate the
law into two sections the Civil bit
still seems to be functioning as a as an
independent Judicial System the rest of
it isn't is that what you're saying um
again nonpolitical
crime you know if you are a if you're a
thief or um you um you punch someone or
you murder someone you know I think
there will not be a great difference in
the way the trial is done from the way
it would have been done over the years
up till now but I think what has
happened is there's been a massive focus
on uh so secession subversion sedition
uh collusion with foreign forces um and
this has really been used to suppress
normal debate and free speech and any
sort of criticism on whatever level of
the Communist Party Line I think
particularly bad case was the case of
the speech therapists the um the five
speech therapists who published this
children's book which was we we'd
probably call it a satire or a cartoon
it had the Hong Kong people as sheep and
um the Chinese Communist party as wolves
and it had cartoon type illustrations
and they were they were prosecuted for
sedition and and given quite long prison
sentences to me that is not the rule of
law I the reason I'm pressing you on
this is I I always thought that there
was an argument to be made that if the
well is poisoned if the well of the rule
of law is poisoned there won't really
ultimately be any bar barriers to how
far that that poison can spread I think
I agree with that and that's another way
of saying what I just said about things
are continuously deteriorating
judges who are trying to do justice are
in a very hard position at the moment
there are plenty still left trying to do
that um but if they decide something
that Beijing doesn't like Beijing
reinterprets we saw that with choice of
council for Jimmy lie um he chose Tim
Owen from London uh very appropriate and
suitable uh King's
Council and uh it went up to the highest
court and they said um Mr O he's
entitled to choose Mr Owen there's no
rule that because Mr Owen's not Chinese
he can't represent him and it was just
overturned in fact that's a part of the
basic law that the defendant is entitled
to the Council of their own choice not
AB
yes but the um situation
now has come much more into
International tension because of the
resignation of some of these foreign
judges who sat on the court of final
appeal court of appeal rather I I'm just
wondering first of all do you think they
should have resigned earlier no I don't
when I was chairman of the bar I
strongly opposed their resignation at
that time Lisa nandy uh the labor
politician was pushing hard for them to
resign and it looked as if they might be
forced to and I spoke to the English Bar
Council by video and said no this is
totally harmful this will just make the
system collapse quicker and uh that
carried the day at that point and the
way I look at it preventing harm is a
form of doing good and simply by being
there and giving honest judgments they
were preventing harm someone put it to
me rather well when I discussed this
issue they said to me your former
clients who are in jail awaiting trial
in the Democratic 47 case you can be
certain they all want the foreign judges
to stay but what evidence is there that
the presence of the foreign judges made
any difference well you'd have to weigh
all you'd have to look at all the cases
it works on two levels it's not
necessarily just the um the verdict the
decision it's
also the effect on
standards these foreign judges are the
very top of the tree when it comes to
judges they're former presidents of the
UK Supreme Court the Canadian Supreme
Court and so on and their caliber of
legal reasoning is very high
and this is a good it it assists the
local judges so I was very sorry to see
them go I fully understand that there
comes a point at which you cannot stay
without becoming complicit in things
that you shouldn't um I am not and I
fear we will reach that point but I
don't actually think we've reached it
quite yet we have one of them this
Canadian judge who who has in fact
resigned um who has issued this rather
interesting statement about how the rule
of law is flourishing in Hong Kong and
is impeccable and all the rest of it
well I haven't seen Beverly mclin's
statement I I think she's the person
you're talking about
um and they are all different and I
would not go so far as to say it is
flourishing I would say it is under
siege but I wouldn't go so far as Lord
suion went recently and said that it was
becoming totalitarian and he therefore
he couldn't
stay um Lord suion swung around very
fast because just a couple of years ago
he was saying he saw nothing wrong at
all and he was
continuing and I think the position is
really in between his two positions
things have been
deteriorating but
um I believe those foreign judges can
and sometimes do make a positive
contribution to the rule of law and I
think it's good if they stay once
they've gone they'll never come back uh
and once they've gone that'll be a big
step towards a totalitarian state
m
[Music]
[Laughter]
[Music]
do you in the course of your if you like
your British um political life do you
sense there's much interest in Hong Kong
much awareness well far much less than I
would like of course there are lots of
Hong Kong people here now and no one
knows exactly but somewhere between 160
and 200,000 and there are some towns
where there are quite a lot of Hong Kong
people and Hong Kong is an issue but on
the whole it isn't and people know very
little about it and this is rather
depressing but they never did know much
about it some people do know but it's
not as widely known as it should be I
mean you're running for office at the
moment as a a liberal Democrat candidate
I think it's fair to say the liberal
Democrats have more about Hong Kong in
their Manifesto than any of the other
parties
but do you think Hong Kong will ever
become a high priority issue in British
foreign policy I'd like that's exactly
what I'd like to see happen but uh it
will be a fight uh liberal Democrats
have very long record Patty ashtown you
probably know when the Bing Massacre
happened in 1989 he went to Hong Kong
and he joined the demonstrators in the
street and he felt very strongly about
this he was a Chinese speaker and he
made it high priority for him I I worked
with him a bit in the last year of his
life about Hong Kong in
2018 um the lib Dems won't change about
Hong Kong they do care about it and that
will continue um but there won't be the
government to be bled well unless there
is some fluke of the electoral system um
that but the two major
parties um there are individuals in the
conservative party who speak out about
Hong Kong the the government publishes
its little six-monthly report detailing
anything that's going wrong but what
they don't appear to do is to link Hong
Kong and the joint declaration to other
issues involving
China what I think might achieve more is
a linkage across policy if China wants a
joint investment project or want some uh
favor from Britain in another area the
British government should would say well
we're willing to do that but you must
observe the joint declaration in Hong
Kong and specifically you must not
charge people with offenses because they
support democracy but it hasn't happened
with the conservatives and on the labor
side I detect no interest at all in Hong
Kong and labor party is more than likely
to become the next government so that's
right I find this very disappointing uh
um
they're not they don't seem all that
interested in foreign policy apart from
one or two hot button
issues
um I'd like to try and do something to
change that but uh you know there are
limits to what one person can do well
Paul Harris thank you very much indeed
there's limits to what we could all do I
think thank you Steve
[Music]
[Music]
[Music]
this is perfect right great the last one
felt better yeah last one is yeah
Weitere ähnliche Videos ansehen
CCP National Security Law destroys Hong Kong. The US House legislates to address current situation.
How 156 years of British rule shaped Hong Kong
China’s Most Powerful Weapon Is NOT What You Think
Hong Kong set to pass controversial security law | DW News
#MM|坐足5程巴士 實試香港巴士公路旅行!睇香港最靚巴士線 由新界坐到港島從中睇巴士規劃 一條路線係點設計?新界最長巴士線 車程長過飛台灣?|#旅遊止癮 #4K
Building your city's climate resilience, now | Natalie Chung | TEDxTinHauWomen
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)