Exclusive: UK judge Neuberger – who ruled in Jimmy Lai case – mulls role on int’l media freedom panel, legal body says
Hong Kong Free Press
A UK judge who was among a panel who denied media tycoon Jimmy Lai and six other democrats an appeal over a 2019 protest on Monday is reconsidering his position on an advisory board to an international press freedom NGO, a legal body has told HKFP.
The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) said on Wednesday that David Neuberger – an Overseas Non-Permanent Judge of the Court of Final Appeal – will soon issue a statement about his role as Chair of the High Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom.
The panel advises the Media Freedom Coalition, composed of 51 countries, which seeks to “promote media freedom through advocacy, diplomatic interventions, legal reforms, events and funding,” according to its website.
The IBAHRI told HKFP that, earlier this summer, the British judge had informed the coalition that he was rethinking his position. Neuberger told the group: “In view of my continuing role as an Overseas Non-Permanent Judge of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, I am in the process of considering my position as Chair of the High Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom, in consultation with my Deputy Chairs. I will issue a statement with my decision as soon as practicable. In the meantime, the High Level Panel will continue its vital work within the Media Freedom Coalition, ably led by its Deputy Chairs.”
HKFP has reached out to Neuberger.
Monday judgement
On Monday, democracy figures Martin Lee, Margaret Ng, Jimmy Lai, Albert Ho, Lee Cheuk-yan, “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung and Cyd Ho lost an appeal to overturn their convictions for knowingly taking part in an unauthorised assembly on August 18, 2019. Neuberger was among a panel of judges who unanimously rejected the democrats’ argument that their conviction was disproportionate to the protection of their basic human rights.
“The defendants’ proposition is unsustainable. It is contrary to all established principles governing constitutional challenges in Hong Kong and especially contrary to accepted principles for assessing proportionality,” the judgement read.
On Tuesday, the Hong Kong government expressed its endorsement of the top court decision. Hong Kong citizens have the right to “peaceful assembly and procession conducted in accordance with the law,” a statement read. “That said, these rights must be exercised in conformity with the relevant legislation to ensure the safeguarding of national security, public order, public safety and the protection of the rights and freedom of others.”
The authorities backed the court’s rejection of UK rulings on free assembly: “In view of the differences between the respective frameworks for human rights challenges in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom, the court also held that the decisions of the two UK cases should not be followed in Hong Kong[.]”
In the judgement, Neuberger ruled that the constitutional differences in the Hong Kong and UK legal systems did not mandate a different approach when considering whether a restriction on the right of assembly was proportionate. But they do require a different approach “if the court concludes that the restriction is or may not be proportionate,” he said.
Aside from the protest case, Jimmy Lai, founder of Hong Kong’s defunct Apple Daily newspaper and a high-profile supporter of the city’s democracy movement, has been accused of violating the Beijing-imposed national security law. If convicted, he faces life in prison. The 76-year-old is on trial for two counts of taking part in a “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces” under the security legislation, and also for conspiring to publish “seditious” materials.
‘Ongoing assault on fundamental freedoms’
Asia Digital Program Manager Michael Caster of Article 19, a UK rights NGO, was among those rallying for Neuberger to resign from the court in light of Monday’s ruling.
“Hong Kong is systematically abandoning all pretence of the rule of law with each unjust decision such as this, made worse by the imprimatur of foreign justices like Lord Neuberger, who lamentably also chairs the High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom under the global Media Freedom Coalition,” he wrote in a Tuesday press release. “No amount of judicial pageantry can change the purely political nature of the ongoing assault on fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong.”
In June, Neuberger told Reuters that he would remain as a top court judge “to support the rule of law in Hong Kong, as best I can.”
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
HKFP has an impartial stance, transparent funding, and balanced coverage guided by an Ethics Code and Corrections Policy.
Support press freedom & help us surpass 1,000 monthly Patrons: 100% independent, governed by an ethics code & not-for-profit.