Case Study: The Central/SAR Relations Since 1997

Abstract

Although not much time has elapsed since China resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong, a number of issues and cases have occurred involving Central/SAR relations. Examples are those regarding the legality of the establishment of a provisional legislative council, the issue of revising a number of laws dating back to “bygone dynastic eras,” the adaptation of laws (by replacing such terms and concepts as “British imperial” and “official” with “national”), the issue of the legal status of the Xinhua News Agency HK Branch Office, the issue of whether the director of the Xinhua News Agency HK Branch Office has been constrained by the “Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance,” the Hu Xian [Aw Sian] Incident, and so forth. Among these cases, those which have caused fairly big repercussions are the issue of the legality of the SAR Provisional Legislative Council, the issue of the right of abode in Hong Kong, cases of the desecration of the national flag, the Zhang Ziqiang (Cheung Tze-Keung) Case and the Li Yuhui Case. One of the chief reasons for the emergence of these unique legal issues is that in accordance with the Basic Law, both regions retain their own legal and judicial systems and, in terms of law, “one country, two systems” became “one country two laws [legal systems].” This plus the increasingly close economic, financial, and civil exchanges between the regions have made many legal issues quite complicated. The problems would not exist if “one country one system” or “one country one law” was being implemented. However, as compared to these legal issues, “one country, two systems” is more fundamental and should not be negated because it has given rise to legal problems of one sort or another. On the contrary, such cases and issues ought to be handled in accordance with the “one country, two systems” principle and the Basic Laws. The handling of such cases and problems is also a direct test of the “one country, two systems” principle and the Basic Laws, and the handling of each case has deepened people’s understanding of “one country, two systems” and the Basic Laws.