Advertisement

Opinion | Why separation of powers has no place in Hong Kong’s political structure

  • The Basic Law lays down an executive-led system, while providing for the division of powers among the executive, judiciary and legislature
  • While court judgments have referred to ‘separation of powers’, they have not addressed the concept in detail and have also affirmed the executive-led system

Reading Time:4 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
Illustration: Craig Stephens

The desperate attempt to try to latch on to a phrase or label without properly understanding what it entails is pathetic. The suggestion that the concept of “separation of powers” is a given in the constitutional order of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is an oversimplification.

Advertisement
One must not lose sight of the fact that we are not looking at something in the abstract but at the constitutional structure of the Hong Kong SAR. An analysis of the constitutional order must not be based on what anyone has said or desired, but what is set out in the Chinese constitution and the Basic Law.

The concept of “separation of powers” has attracted multiple interpretations, expositions and understandings internationally by scholars, judges and academics. Very briefly, the French philosopher Montesquieu’s theory involved the separation of the executive, legislative and judicial powers of government, and the balancing of the unequal power among them. Montesquieu viewed judges as “no more than the mouth that pronounces the words of the law.”

In contrast, the English philosopher John Locke’s exposition differentiates between legislative power, executive power and what he terms “federative” power, which effectively are powers relating to foreign affairs, with no emphasis on the role of the judiciary. The English political theorist M.J.C. Vile’s “pure doctrine” separated the legislative, executive and judicial branches strictly, confining each branch to exercising its own function without encroaching upon the functions of others.

The United States Constitution aims to provide for separation of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, each with separate institutions and personnel. Yet, the president nominates Supreme Court judges. Potential Supreme Court judges have to attend nomination hearings before the US Senate Judiciary Committee to be questioned and to provide testimony before being confirmed by the US Senate.
The building housing the Court of Final Appeal in Central, Hong Kong. The French philosopher Montesquieu viewed judges as “no more than the mouth that pronounces the words of the law”. Photo: EPA-EFE
The building housing the Court of Final Appeal in Central, Hong Kong. The French philosopher Montesquieu viewed judges as “no more than the mouth that pronounces the words of the law”. Photo: EPA-EFE
Advertisement

In the United Kingdom, the concept of parliamentary sovereignty, where Parliament is the supreme legal authority, means that it cannot be overruled by the courts. There is also no clear separation between the executive and legislature, and indeed up until 2005, between the legislature and the judiciary either.

In discussing the doctrine of separation of powers, it is important to bear in mind two points. First, the political structure of a state is entirely a matter within the sovereign right of that state. Secondly, the People’s Republic of China is a unitary state and all power comes from the central authorities. The people’s congress system is China’s political system.

loading
Advertisement