In the wake of the failed insurrection in Hong Kong in 2019-20, one of the West’s vilest tactics has been to demean its legal system. It knows the city’s success has always been underpinned by its rule of law, and that the best way to harm it is to undermine its judiciary. 

Although the United States is the mastermind, and sought, through punitive measures, to wreck Hong Kong in 2020-21, the United Kingdom has eagerly played along. Despite its historic ties with Hong Kong, it has, sadly, shown itself to be just another fair-weather friend. 

In March 2022, for example, when the UK’s then foreign secretary, Liz Truss, pressured two serving British judges into resigning as nonpermanent judges of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (HKCFA), she declared it was “no longer tenable” for the judges to continue serving as it would risk “legitimizing oppression”. 

In seeking to weaken the HKCFA, Truss ignored what its judges had to say. The former chief justice of Canada, Beverly McLachlin, for example,  is a nonpermanent member, and she explained the HKCFA was “operating as an independent, judicial arm of government”, meaning resignations were unnecessary.   

The next month, a gaggle of noisy prima donnas, led by Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC and styling themselves as the “international legal team” of the national security suspect, Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, filed an “urgent appeal” before the United Nations Human Rights Council, in Geneva. Although Lai had been imprisoned for his involvement in unauthorized assemblies, Gallagher condemned “the legal harassment against him”. This, she claimed, was because it violated his “internationally protected rights to freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and the right to peaceful protest”.

Gallagher even called on the UN’s “experts” to “consider all the cases against him”. This, she alleged, was because they constituted “prosecutorial, judicial and legal harassment”. Although, as she must have expected, she received short shrift, she obviously hoped that some of the dirt she threw at Hong Kong would stick (she has yet to explain how her grandstanding could possibly benefit Lai).

In May 2023, the US Congress’ Congressional-Executive Committee on China (CECC), which is controlled by China-haters, upped the ante. It called upon the US government to “consider imposing sanctions” on the 29 judges in Hong Kong, some British, who had presided over national security cases. It claimed there was a “weakened judiciary” in the city, and that “basic procedural rights” were being disregarded in criminal trials, including the “presumption of innocence” (which, given it is enshrined in the national security legislation, would have come as news to judges and lawyers alike). 

Although the US likes to pose as the champion of the “rules-based international order”, this is a chimera. It is a serial rules-breaker, as the prosecutor of the UN’s International Criminal Court (ICC), Fatou Bensouda, found out to her cost in 2020. When Bensouda, while discharging her ICC mandate under the UN’s Rome Statute, began investigating if US personnel had committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in Afghanistan, the then-president Donald Trump hit the roof. Instead of providing Bensouda with every support as she sought to get to the bottom of the allegations, he imposed punitive sanctions on her and her deputy, Phakiso Mochochoko. 

The US classified the two ICC prosecutors as “specially designated nationals”, alongside terrorists and drug traffickers. Their assets were blocked, they and their families were denied US visas, and American citizens were prohibited from having any dealings with them. Although this contemptible abuse of power cried out for global condemnation, the UK and the other proxies coyly looked away, fearful of upsetting Trump. 

In the highest prosecutorial traditions, however, Bensouda and Mochochoko refused to be intimidated by the US, and they continued with their investigations into the alleged atrocities in Afghanistan. Indeed, their extraordinary courage is an example for anybody in Hong Kong who might now feel intimidated by the latest threats coming out of Washington.

Although Trump’s successor, Joe Biden, recognizing the enormity of his actions, repealed the two prosecutors’ sanctions in 2021, Trump’s dastardly behavior caused the US grave reputational damage, but the CECC has learned nothing from the episode. 

Although Joe Biden disregarded the CECC’s earlier call for sanctions on the 29 Hong Kong judges, it has not given up. On Nov 2, its co-chairman, Senator Jeff Merkley, and two of its commissioners, Senator Dan Sullivan and Representative Jim McGovern, joined with other US lawmakers to co-sponsor a bill calling on the US government to impose sanctions on 49 Hong Kong judges and officials (including HKCFA permanent and nonpermanent judges). However despicable, they clearly imagine there are votes to be had in threatening Hong Kong, and they undoubtedly hope their false allegations will harm China.  

As some of the HKCFA judges the CECC wants sanctioned are British nationals, it will be fascinating to see if the UK government will spring to their defense (and that of the other judges).  If, for fear of upsetting Washington, the foreign secretary, James Cleverly, does nothing, as is his wont, he will have shown just how contemptible his government has become. Indeed, looking at his track record, nobody should hold their breath.

In September, when the UK government issued its latest six-monthly report on Hong Kong, it displayed not only its ignorance but also its bias.  Although it has proved the city’s salvation, Cleverly alleged that the National Security Law for Hong Kong “continues to undermine Hong Kong’s legal and judicial systems”, which must have gratified the CECC no end.  

It would also have delighted Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative Party leader, who is now a co-chairman of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), which spreads China-hostile propaganda in national parliaments. A visceral Sinophobe, he relishes maligning Hong Kong’s judiciary, and, in 2020, he told the Sydney Morning Herald that, whereas judges in the UK and Australia were “free to reach decisions without fear or favor,” this was “not the case in Hong Kong”. This, as any of the HKCFA’s British and Australian judges could have told him, was untrue, but fact checking was the last thing on his mind. In 2021, he was sanctioned by Beijing for what it called his “lies and disinformation” about China.   

However pathetic, Duncan Smith’s criticisms, like Truss’s, are fueled by his yearning to stay relevant, while also cozying up to Washington. On Sept 28, he wrote to James Cleverly, urging him to oppose China’s membership of the UN Human Rights Council. In support, he trotted out the hoary old myth, invented by Hong Kong Watch and regurgitated by IPAC (its offshoot), that China had committed “violations of international law and human rights in Hong Kong”.         

Once the world knows the truth about Hong Kong, it will see through the mischief making of the US and its proxies

It’s clear, therefore, that Hong Kong has been the victim of a sustained campaign of lies and intimidation, undertaken in various forums by politicians on both sides of the Atlantic. Although orchestrated by the US, it has relied on the likes of Truss, Cleverly and Duncan Smith to do much of its dirty work. While, however, they may have pulled the wool over the eyes of the gullible, they have certainly not hoodwinked everybody, as the World Justice Project (WJP) has just shown.  

The WJP was founded in 2006, as a presidential initiative of the American Bar Association. It became an independent, nonprofit organization in 2009, and its offices are situated in Washington DC, Seattle, Singapore and Mexico City. It describes itself as an “independent, multi-disciplinary organization working to create knowledge, build awareness, and stimulate action to advance the rule of law worldwide”.

Since 2009, the WJP has published annually its Rule of Law Index, which is now the world’s leading source for original, independent data on the rule of law. It covers 142 countries and jurisdictions, and, to assess how the rule of law is experienced and perceived globally, it relies upon over 149,000 household surveys and 3,400 legal practitioner/expert surveys. The index focuses on eight categories, covering constraints on government powers, absence of corruption, open government, fundamental rights (including order and security), enforcement of regulations, civil justice and criminal justice. 

The WJP defines the rule of law as a “durable system of laws, institutions, norms, and community commitment that delivers: accountability, just laws, open government, and accessible justice”.  

Rigid methodology is applied in the Rule of Law Index’s compilation, and it is now used by governments, multilateral organizations, businesses, academia, media and civil society stakeholders as a means of assessing and addressing weaknesses in the rule of law. Its assessments are closely watched, and, while most jurisdictions aspire to high rankings, many are disappointed.

To its credit, Hong Kong, despite Western efforts to inflict reputational harm, has consistently rated highly in the Rule of Law Index.  Whereas it was ranked 16th in the 2020 index, it was rated at 23rd in the 2023 index (out of the 142 places surveyed), issued on Oct 25. This small adjustment, given the sustained levels of Western propaganda, is wholly understandable, although the city’s inner strengths have more than contained the impact. 

In context, Hong Kong’s creditable top-25 ranking this year can, after its recent trauma, only be viewed as a significant achievement, and the WJP identified various positives.

Although Hong Kong’s overall score decreased slightly by 0.2 percent over 2022 (when it ranked 22nd), it remained at 0.73 after rounding up. Indeed, its overall score is the same as that recorded for the countries that ranked 20th, 21st and 22nd (Czechia, France, Latvia).

In the East Asia and the Pacific region, Hong Kong came 6th out of the 15 jurisdictions surveyed, with Singapore securing 4th place.  

In the crucial areas of absence of corruption and order and security, the city maintained its 9th ranking (testament to its clean civil service and the efficacy of its national security arrangements). A welcome 0.01 point rise was recorded in the fundamental rights category (it being ranked three times higher globally over the previous rating). 

Although Hong Kong’s scores declined slightly in the areas of constraints on government powers, open government and civil justice, there was no change over last year for criminal justice (20th) and regulatory enforcement (17th).  

One notable feature of Hong Kong’s top-25 rating this year is the way in which it has left many Western countries in the shade, including some who have sought to harm it. The US, despite its endless pontificating, could only manage 26th place, while a slew of European countries did even worse. Whereas, for example, the index ranked Portugal at 28th, Italy at 32nd, and Poland at 36th, Greece came in at 47th, with Bulgaria at 59th.  

What is clear, therefore, from the Rule of Law Index 2023, is that, once detailed studies are conducted by objective observers, a rosy picture emerges of Hong Kong’s situation. In other words, although the likes of Merkley, Cleverly and Duncan Smith may dupe some people with their hostile propaganda, there is nothing like empirical research by independent experts to expose their myths. 

It must be hoped, therefore, that the decision-makers in Washington, when they consider the latest CECC-backed attempt to sanction Hong Kong judges and officials, will take fully on board the WJP’s 2023 index. After all, Hong Kong has been ranked higher than the US when it comes to the rule of law, and even the most blinkered ideologues should be able to get their heads around the implications of this.   

When commenting on this year’s index, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government spokesman said it “would continue to enhance the international community’s proper understanding of the rule of law situation in Hong Kong, thereby telling the good stories of Hong Kong”, and this is the best strategy. 

Once the world knows the truth about Hong Kong, it will see through the mischief making of the US and its proxies. They, in turn, will realize they are on a hiding to nothing. 

The author 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.