By Jerome A. Cohen
Following the surprise public pledge of China’s Ministry of Public Security (MPS) to “fully direct and support Hong Kong police” to stop violence and chaos, which I commented on earlier in my blog, the Party Central Political-Legal Affairs Commission (Party PLC) announced that it’s very necessary for national security agencies to establish institutions in Hong Kong.
I was asked why the Party PLC makes a statement on Hong Kong. The Party PLC controls the MPS, the Ministry of State Security (MSS) and other government security agencies. Since the MPS has announced that it will “direct” the Hong Kong police, the Party PLC will in fact be indirectly directing the Hong Kong police, if it does not already do so.
The Central Party authorities undoubtedly also influence the Hong Kong Government in other respects, not only via the Central Government Liaison Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Office in Hong Kong but also through less public and official channels, including Party channels.
This influence inevitably reaches the Department of Justice and its Director of Public Prosecutions, which is where the decisions are made to prosecute alleged offenders on the basis of evidence produced by the police. This evidence will soon openly include information produced by the national security agencies, which have until now been quietly cooperating with the Hong Kong police.
This in no way formally impinges upon the independence or jurisdiction of the Hong Kong courts. I have seen no evidence of Party infiltration of the Hong Kong courts or Hong Kong Government interference with the courts. Of course, there is need for further investigation and analysis of the meaning of “interference”. In every legal system, and that of Colonial Hong Kong was no exception as I know from personal experience dating from 1963, courts operate within their particular political, social and economic as well as legal contexts, and judges, individually and collectively, are not unaware of the local context or devoid of personal relationships and ambitions. In particular, it will be interesting to learn, if we can, whether MPS or MSS agents or, much more likely their intermediaries, will attempt to contact Hong Kong judges. Representatives of the security agencies are not likely to issue Hong Kong judges the “invitations to tea” so dreaded on the Mainland, but don’t rule out amiable dinners with mutual friends!