(Editor’s note: The following are remarks of Grenville Cross SC at the ALB Hong Kong Law Awards 2024 held on Sept 13)
I am most grateful to ALB Thomson Reuters for having invited me to address you tonight, and I congratulate them for arranging another excellent evening. It is no mean feat to bring so many eminent lawyers together, but the cause could hardly be worthier. I must admit to being more than a little over-awed at being surrounded by so much legal talent, but I hope to rise to the occasion.
The awards being made tonight will undoubtedly spur the recipients to greater heights, while also inspiring their peers to seek to emulate their example. Those who have missed out this year will only have done so very narrowly and must not be discouraged, for they will live to fight another day. Everybody who serves the law in Hong Kong seeks excellence, and tonight’s awards are a vivid demonstration that its legal system is in good hands.
Although many of you come from Hong Kong, some do not, so let me say a little about the city many of us call home. Hong Kong is an international city and its successes deserve to be trumpeted. It is fortunate to have lawyers and law firms who rank highly in the Asia Pacific region, and whose prowess is globally recognized. After the reunification in 1997, their contributions have done much to sustain the capitalist system and way of life envisaged by the Basic Law, our mini-constitution.
However, although the judiciary, the public lawyers and the private practitioners have maintained the highest legal standards in Hong Kong since 1997, not everybody is well disposed toward us. There are people elsewhere who wish to undermine the rule of law and erode our way of life. There have, for example, both this year and last, been threats from politicians in the US Congress to sanction our judges, prosecutors and barristers. They imagine that if they can undermine our legal system it will harm China, such being their real objective.
However, they are on a hiding to nothing. In the face of threats, our legal system has proved itself resilient, and has gone from strength to strength. Although, following governmental and other pressures, several fainthearts from the United Kingdom who sat as non-permanent judges of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (HKCFA) threw in the towel, the real story lies elsewhere. The bulk of the overseas judges have stood their ground, and, in the best traditions of the common law world, have refused to be pushed around.
The quitters, moreover, have since been replaced by eminent judges from elsewhere. Two former chief justices from Australia, Justices Patrick Keane and Michael Allsopp, have more than filled the shoes of those who departed. Indeed, when Justice Keane was appointed to the HKCFA in 2023, he explained “how successful” the HKCFA had been in “upholding the rule of law.”
We are, moreover, fortunate that a cohort of legal titans has remained true to both their calling and the city, and they have stood with Hong Kong throughout. Indeed, Lord (David) Neuberger, perhaps the most eminent of the HKCFA’s overseas judges, exemplifies what a great jurist should be. As he once explained, “the rule of law is fundamental to any civilized society, and that is never more true than in challenging times.”
Lord Neuberger served as the president of the UK Supreme Court from 2012 to 2017, and has been an overseas non-permanent judge of the HKCFA since 2009. As many of you will know, his judgments are impeccable, and invariably the last word on the subject. He is principled, professional and wise, and has refused to be intimidated by lesser mortals. When the bully boys tried to pressurize him into resigning, his response was typical of the man. He vowed to remain, pledging to continue “to support the rule of law in Hong Kong, as best I can.”
I have never met Lord Neuberger, but we can all take comfort from the knowledge that as long as Hong Kong has judges of his quality at the apex of its legal system, there is absolutely no need for anybody to worry about the future of the rule of law.
And it is precisely because of the high quality of the local and overseas judges on the HKCFA, the excellence of the legal profession and the standards of the public lawyers, that the rule of law has flourished, and you do not simply need to take my word for it.
In the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index 2023, Hong Kong was rated 23rd out of the 142 countries and jurisdictions surveyed, which was remarkable so soon after the social disturbances of 2019-20. Within the individual categories, Hong Kong was rated 6th for security and order, and 9th for the absence of corruption, which was no less commendable.
The WJP’s Rule of Law Index is the world’s leading source for original, independent data on the rule of law, and has more than established its credentials over the years. Whereas the UK, at 15th, and Singapore, at 17th, were ahead of Hong Kong, we were hot on their heels. Moreover, Hong Kong outshone a host of other places which also pride themselves on the rule of law, including the US (26), Italy (32), Poland (36), and Greece (47). In the East Asia and Pacific Region, Hong Kong was ranked 6th out of the 15 places surveyed.
Moreover, the WJP’s Rule of Law Index ranking was not a flash in the pan. Since 2015, for example, Hong Kong has been among the top five professional centers for arbitration globally, according to the International Arbitration Survey conducted by Queen Mary University of London. In the most recent 2021 International Arbitration Survey, Hong Kong was ranked the third most popular seat for arbitration, and I imagine that some of those here tonight will have had more than a hand in this. If so, I thank you for your contribution, and urge you to redouble your efforts going forward.
It was also immensely encouraging that in the World Competitiveness Yearbook 2024, published by the International Institute for Management Development, Hong Kong was ranked the 5th most competitive economy among the 67 economies surveyed. It was, for example, well ahead of the USA (12th), Australia (13th), and Canada (19th). And in the individual category of absence of bribery and corruption, a key criterion, Hong Kong was ranked 4th in the world and 1st in the Asia-Pacific, for which we are indebted to the ICAC. By being a clean city, Hong Kong has underscored its status as a leading business center and a major financial hub.
However, Hong Kong’s achievements should not surprise anybody. They arise directly from the successful implementation of the “one country, two systems” governing policy, which has guaranteed the continuity of our capitalist system and our way of life. It has also ensured that we retain our common law legal system, our independent judiciary, our independent prosecution service and our independent legal profession. Indeed, the awardees and the other finalists have all been able to flourish in a secure legal environment that encourages excellence, prioritizes common law values and rewards professionalism.
Of course, there have been some changes since reunification, and, for example, the HKCFA, based in Hong Kong, has replaced the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, based in London, as the ultimate appellate body, but that is no bad thing. Residents can now seek justice locally, and they can often do this at a fraction of the cost of travelling to England.
Our people, moreover, have taken full advantage of their new access to justice, as the HKCFA’s workload proves. In 2023, for example, it disposed of 372 applications for leave to appeal from the High Court in criminal and civil cases, and determined 22 substantive appeals. This was a big increase over the Privy Council era, and it demonstrates that people have confidence in their new legal arrangements.
Just as the judiciary has operated independently since 1997, so also has the prosecution service. I was closely involved in public prosecutions both before and after 1997, and there were never any attempts to force me to prosecute or not to prosecute any particular individual. The prosecutorial criteria today are exactly the same as those applicable when I began prosecuting in Hong Kong in 1978. There can only be a prosecution if there is a reasonable prospect of conviction on the available evidence and if it is in the public interest to proceed.
Although tonight’s awardees and finalists have achieved much, they will undoubtedly have suffered setbacks in their careers. By overcoming them, they will have strengthened their characters and increased their resolve, such also being my experience. I once underwent injustice in my own career, and discovered how setbacks can have happy endings.
In 1994, when I was the Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions, the DPP retired and I applied for the post. Although I had lived in Hong Kong for 15 years, was eminently qualified and was a permanent resident, it availed me not. I was told I could not have the job because the administration of the governor, Chris Patten, had decided to “localize” it, along with other civil service posts.
By this they meant that only Chinese permanent residents would be considered. Although this struck me as discriminatory and contrary to the equality of treatment protections enjoyed by permanent residents under the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance, which the British-era government had enacted only three years prior, there was little I could do. I had to accept my career was seemingly at an end, and it was a low point. However, I decided to battle on, which was a wise decision.
Once 1997 arrived and Patten departed, everything changed. The DPP post again became vacant, and this time the incoming Hong Kong SAR Government appointed me to it. They were pragmatic, and took the view that if a foreigner was a permanent resident who was committed to Hong Kong, he or she would not be discriminated against in employment, which was a breath of fresh air after the Patten years.
Indeed, it was a classic application of Deng Xiaoping’s famous dictum, “It does not matter if the cat is black or white, provided it can catch the mice.” My appointment also sent out a powerful message to the expatriate community that it was welcome in the new Hong Kong, and that its contribution to the city’s progress would be valued, and so it has proved.
The moral of the story, therefore, is to never give in or give up, to try to take setbacks in your stride, and to hope that through your own determination and hard work, and a little bit of help from lady luck, things will right themselves in due course.
However, enough of reminiscences, and back to the business of the evening. There are 56 awardees drawn from four categories, and they, together with all the finalists, are to be congratulated for excelling in the face of what must have been very stiff competition. In their own distinctive ways, each will have contributed significantly to their own legal environments, for which they can take great pride.
However, they must not rest on their laurels, as Hong Kong needs their services. Although many of them are already leaders in their fields, they should expand their horizons and raise their voices on behalf of their home city whenever necessary. It is sometimes said that it is important to tell “good stories” about Hong Kong, and this should not be difficult. As those of us who live and work here can attest, there is much of which we can be rightly proud.
In conclusion, the awardees and the finalists are not the only people to whom I wish to pay tribute tonight. Their achievements also reflect great credit on everybody who has helped them in their careers, whether families, tutors, mentors, fellow professionals or law firms. Without their support, they would not be here tonight. So, while rejoicing in the success of those who have excelled, let us also salute those who have sustained and encouraged them, in good times and bad.
Grenville Cross is a senior counsel and law professor, and was previously the director of public prosecutions of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
