Departure from International Human Rights Law and Comparative Best Practice: HKSAR v Tong Ying Kit

Abstract

This article examines the verdict in HKSAR v Tong Ying Kit, the first criminal trial under the new National Security Law's secession and counter-terrorism criminal provisions. The article uses international human rights law and comparative law on counter-terrorism to argue that the verdict ignores rights-based jurisprudence, which could reconcile the tensions between human rights protec-tions and safeguarding national security. As a result, the ruling sets an example of the local courts' failure to integrate international human rights law and comparative best practice and thus to mount an effective, rights-based response to the enforcement of the national security law. As Tong decided not to file an appeal, his case serves as a disturbing precedent that will influence other national security trials that are already making their way through the courts.