British judges will be withdrawn from serving in Hong Kong’s top court because of concerns about the erosion of human rights.
The Foreign Office said it was “no longer tenable” for serving UK judges to sit in the court because of the impact of the national security law imposed by Beijing.
Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, said their presence risked “legitimising oppression” because of the Hong Kong authorities’ actions, including restrictions on freedom of expression, the stifling of opposition voices, and the criminalising of dissent.
She said: “We have seen a systematic erosion of liberty and democracy in Hong Kong. Since the national security law was imposed, authorities have cracked down on free speech, the free press and free association.
“The situation has reached a tipping point where it is no longer tenable for British judges to sit on Hong Kong’s leading court, and would risk legitimising oppression. I welcome and wholeheartedly support the decision to withdraw British judges from the court.”
But critics have accused Truss of hypocrisy, pointing out that the UK government has sought to pass legislation which cracked down on the right to protest.
Earlier this month, MPs pushed through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill in the Commons, handing police new powers to crack down on protests.
The legislation is part of a range of measures aimed at overhauling the criminal justice system, which will let police in England and Wales impose conditions on non-violent demonstrations deemed to be too noisy.
When it was first published, Amnesty UK warned that the legislation represented an “enormous and unprecedented extension of policing powers”, handing authorities the power “to effectively ban peaceful protests should they see fit”.
The Joint Committee on Human Rights also raised concerns, warning that the bill would significantly curtail an individual’s right to protest.
However the bill was still passed in the Commons, despite opposition from a number of Tory backbenchers who said it was “unfortunate” that the government was bringing forward noise-based restrictions on protests when people in Ukraine were “dying for their beliefs and for the rights of freedom of speech and of association”.
Jesse Norman, a former Conservative minister, told MPs: “No case has been made, no serious case have been made, that this is a real and genuine problem.
“The minister has conceded I think and one understands why that it is not like abuse except in the tiniest minority of cases and therefore one has to ask the question, whether the justification is adequate for the measure.”
And peers this week defied the government for the second time, rejecting ministers’ plans to clamp down on “noisy” protests and voting to strip them from the legislation by 208 votes to 166.
The decision to pull serving UK judges from Hong Kong’s top court was taken following discussions with Dominic Raab and Lord Reed, the president of the Supreme Court.
He said: “The courts in Hong Kong continue to be internationally respected for their commitment to the rule of law.
“Nevertheless, I have concluded, in agreement with the Government, that the judges of the Supreme Court cannot continue to sit in Hong Kong without appearing to endorse an administration which has departed from values of political freedom, and freedom of expression, to which the justices of the Supreme Court are deeply committed.”
Related: Second Tory minister reluctantly admits Partygate scandal broke the law
