2016年香港立法会选举及宣誓风波法律评析———历史和比较法的视角 (A Legal Analysis of the 2016 Hong Kong Legislative Council Oath-Taking Controversy: A Historical and Comparative Perspective)

Abstract

Chinese Abstract: 本文首先从普通法的角度分析2016年香港法院针对立法会两位议员“辱华宣誓”案件的判决，接着从英国法、英殖时期香港本地法律及中华人民共和国法律三个方面追溯香港官员、议员和法官就职宣誓制度的历史渊源和演变,并分析了全国人大常委会就«基本法»第104条释法对香港立法会参选资格和宣誓要求的影响和效力问题.文章最后指出:持“港独”立场的政客和人士试图进入香港特别行政区的立法 机关，显然不容于«基本法»所确定的“一国两制”宪制框架及香港本地法律制度。

English Abstract: This paper first examines the Hong Kong court decisions that disqualified two Legislative Council members who pledged an oath that “humiliated China.” Then, it surveys the historical origins and development of the laws governing the oath-taking of officials, legislators, and judges in Hong Kong from three perspectives, with consideration for the relevant laws in the United Kingdom, People’s Republic of China, and Hong Kong during the colonial period. This paper also analyzes the impact and validity of the interpretation issued by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on Article104 of the Hong Kong Basic Law that set out the qualifications of legislators and requirements for oath -taking .The paper concludes that under the constitutional framework of “one country, two systems” and the laws of Hong Kong, the attempts of pro-independence politicians and individuals to become law-makers are doomed to fail.

Note: Downloadable document is available in Chinese.

Keywords: 香港基本法 立法会选举 宣誓 人大释法, Hong Kong Basic Law, Election of Legislative Council, Oath-Taking, Interpretation by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress