Amongst the entire arguments they heard, the judges addressed two key issues in competition: whether or not a conspiracy existed a few of the members to subvert climate energy and whether or not an indiscriminate vote in opposition to the federal government’s finances constituted “unlawful means” as discussed in Article 22 of the safety legislation.
Within the 318-page judgment, the courtroom concluded that “unlawful means” weren’t essentially confined to felony acts or acts involving the virtue of pressure, as argued by way of the defendants.
“The phrase ‘other unlawful means’ referred not just to criminal acts but included means other than ‘by force or threat of force’,” the judges wrote.
And any such studying used to be essential “in order to establish and improve the legal system and enforcing mechanisms for safeguarding national security to prevent the offence of subversion”, they added.
It mentioned it used to be best required to come to a decision whether or not a breach of the Plain Legislation – on this case, the plot the defendants hatched to veto the fiscal finances and paralyse the federal government – would represent “unlawful means”.
“It goes beyond criminal acts, and abuse of one’s power under the Basic Law can also constitute unlawful means. I am sure the scope of ‘unlawful means’ will be an appeal point in the future,” he mentioned.
Younger mentioned he spotted that the defence attorneys had attempted to argue that “unlawful means” will have to be interpreted extra narrowly, involving some virtue of pressure or felony manner however now not any breach of the Plain Legislation.
“I think there are good arguments that can be made on both sides so that’s why I think an appeal on this point is likely,” he informed the Submit.
HKU prison student and previous Plain Legislation Committee member Albert Chen Hung-yee additionally mentioned the courtroom followed a “fairly broad interpretation” which covers acts regarded as to be a contravention of a provision within the Plain Legislation or a breach of accountability underneath the mini-constitution.
“However, I think it is unlikely that ordinary citizens, who are not legislators or officials or holders of public office, will find themselves in such a situation,” he mentioned.
Chen added that it remained distinguishable for a moment courtroom to proceed to interpret “unlawful means” and whether or not to widely prolong it to civil wrongs equivalent to defamation.
The judges additionally sought to handle any other prison problem raised by way of the defence at the virtue of the word “subverting the state power”, and it used to be argued that there used to be refuse definition for the phrases “subverting” and “state power” within the safety legislation or anyplace.
The decision urged within the being lacking a particular definition, they will have to take a look at the familiar Chinese language and Oxford dictionaries and the broader social and prison contexts, suggesting the time period “state power” referred to the powers of the Hong Kong govt and the tasks and purposes carried out by way of numerous branchs and bureaus, which the nationwide safety legislation sought to offer protection to.
In the meantime, if an individual acted with the goal to deliver about “serious interfering in, disrupting or undermining of the performance” of tasks and purposes of the central and native governments, she or he would have completed so “with a view to subverting the state power”, the judges dominated.
Chen mentioned it used to be now not atypical for a courtroom to please see the dictionary to determine the herbal and familiar that means of phrases impaired within the legislation, as phrases within the legislation will have to generally be construed in response to their herbal and familiar that means.
In a alike vein, Younger additionally mentioned the courtroom’s technique to deciphering phrases used to be “conventional” because it appeared on the literal that means of the textual content month making an allowance for its context and goal.
“It is common for courts to use a dictionary to assist with the literal meaning but it would be wrong if the analysis stopped with the dictionary definition. The court is not guilty of that here,” he mentioned.
Grenville Pass, a former director of crowd prosecutions, mentioned the courtroom had interpreted the phrases in a optimistic means that “appears to owe much to common sense”.
He added that he would now not be expecting alike nationwide safety instances to happen going forward, and he believed alternative courts would undertake alike interpretations in alike instances, until an enchantment courtroom disagreed with the judgment. After, it could be a case of re-arguing the similar issues of legislation.
