In the backdrop of these tensions is the looming date of January 31st, when the U.K. will begin accepting applications from Hong Kong’s British National (Overseas)<\/a> (BN(O)) passport holders to live and work in the U.K., providing a path to eventual citizenship for more than three million residents. Representatives of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) are meeting this week in Beijing, where they are reportedly set to discuss plans to introduce retaliatory measures<\/a> over London’s decision to offer BN(O) passport holders a path to the right of abode.<\/p>\n
On Wednesday, facing a torrent criticism from the British government, a top U.K. lawyer hired by the Hong Kong government to prosecute a group of pro-democracy activists withdrew from the case, following broad pushback against his participation. This has highlighted growing unease in London about the political prosecutions being pursued by Hong Kong’s justice department. An experienced lawyer who had previously represented the Hong Kong and British governments in high profile legal cases, David Perry QC had faced condemnation from fellow barristers as well as the U.K. government. The Guardian’s Patrick Wintour reported last week that Foreign Minister Dominic Raab had issued harsh words<\/strong><\/a> about Perry’s initial insistence on continuing with the case:<\/p>\n
\u201cI understand in the case of Mr Perry, in relation to the pro-democracy activists, and of course from Beijing\u2019s point of view, this would be a serious PR coup. There is no doubt in my mind that under the Bar code of ethics a case like this could be resisted and frankly, I think people watching this would regard it as pretty mercenary to be taking up that kind of case.\u201d [Source<\/strong><\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The case against pro-democracy activists that Perry was hired to prosecute centered on an August 18, 2019 protest. Hong Kong prosecutors argued that protestors had ignored police objections and incited a demonstration across the city. Organizers estimated that 1.7 million people participated in the march, which was led by pro-democracy heavyweights including Martin Lee, Albert Ho, and Jimmy Lai. What stood out most about the march was its uncharacteristic peacefulness after more than a month of increasingly violent street battles. A headline in the South China Morning Post<\/a> that weekend read: “three nights of tear gas-free protests as Hong Kong’s anti-government movement gives peace a chance.”<\/p>\n
But in April 2020, police nonetheless went forward with the arrest of 15 prominent pro-democracy activists<\/a> for “organizing and participating in unlawful assemblies.” Citing the complexity of the case, Hong Kong’s justice department decided to hire Perry as their lead counsel in January of this year. On Wednesday, the Financial Times’ Primrose Riordan reported on his withdrawal:<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n
[\u2026] Allies of Mr Perry said he was acting under the \u201ccab rank\u201d principle, whereby barristers take cases as they come up. Other lawyers, however, have argued the principle did not apply when accepting overseas cases. [Source<\/strong><\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\nA leading local lawyer however said, privately, that "it restored my faith in the English Bar."<\/p>\n
— Alvin Lum (@alvinllum) January 20, 2021<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n