bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

sponsorType

authorLocations

authors

paywallTypes

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

factSheets

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

copyrighted

customTimezone

liveContents

Jeffie Lam

When Ambrose Lam San-keung was re-elected president of the Law Society in May, few would have predicted that a month later he would be at the centre of a political storm unprecedented in the history of the solicitors' body.
Last night, he lost a motion of no-confidence following his support for Beijing's white paper that, in reaffirming its authority over Hong Kong, described judges as administrators with a political requirement to love China.
Anger over the paper brought 1,800 lawyers onto the streets in protest, but Lam described it as a "positive document".
Lam, a partner in the law firm Lam, Lee & Lai, went on to describe the Communist Party as "great" in a radio interview - without informing the society's council beforehand.
"His remarks really took us by surprise," a council member said.
Eyebrows were also raised over what some termed Lam's "chameleon-like" change of attitude towards the Occupy Central civil-disobedience movement.

As the newly elected president, he told journalists at a media gathering in June last year that he would contact organisers of the group "to see what legal assistance they would need". If Hong Kong's electoral reforms do not match the movement's ideas of true democracy, then it plans to mobilise 10,000 protesters to block streets in the Central business district.
It was a lawyer's duty, Lam declared, to protect the legal rights of others.
But at another media gathering he hastily called four months later, he said there were no legal grounds for civil disobedience and said the notion of "peaceful violence" was just "beautiful rhetoric".
"I am angry that many people are disrupting the social order and the rule of law by abusing the name of justice," Lam told journalists, without mentioning Occupy Central by name.
"There are ample channels for individuals to express their discontent against the system - either through the legislature or the courts to change the laws."

	I am angry that many people are disrupting the rule of law by abusing the name of justice

	AMBROSE LAM
Despite the controversies, his term has also seen a "breakthrough" cross-border arrangement under which Hong Kong lawyers will be allowed to advise people living in Shenzhen's Qianhai special economic zone.
Announcing it proudly at his June 2013 gathering, he said it followed two years of campaigning and research by the Law Society.
A lawyer who has known Lam for more than 10 years described it as a breakthrough that stood as one of the major contributions Lam had made to the legal sector, though it came largely from work he did before he led the society.
Another of his major contributions was helping to set up the society's Recreation and Sports Committee, the lawyer said.
"Such a committee is so important to bring together members who share the same hobbies," the lawyer added.
However, Lam also landed in hot water last year after he suddenly announced that the Law Society had commissioned a British law school to collect views from people and groups on replacing the qualifying tests provided by the three law schools - University of Hong Kong, Chinese University and City University.
Lam tried to justify the decision by saying the society had received complaints from lawyers about their children failing to gain entry to the existing postgraduate qualification programmes (PCLL).
Professor Johannes Chan Man-mun, dean of Hong Kong University's faculty of law, responded: "We take the students based on … ability, not because of their family background. We don't take into account whether the students come from families who are lawyers."
The conflict between the Law Society and the law schools over the PCLL arrangement remains unresolved. "We did not expect him to announce all the details that gave the public an impression that the Law Society must go ahead with the plan regardless of the views of the three universities," a society member said.  


How Hong Kong can have democracy under ‘one country, two systems’

Hong Kong needs a clear-eyed view of Beijing’s powers under the Basic Law

Joshua Wong acquitted: judge tells activist to reflect on his behaviour, drops police obstruction charges

Joshua Wong seized my water bottle and obstructed my work, Hong Kong policeman tells court

Beijing White Paper 2014

Ambrose Lam courted triumph, controversy as Law Society leader

Ambrose Lam has supported Beijing's white paper on Hong Kong, and spoken out against Occupy Central. Photo: Dickson Lee

Lam said the white paper was "positive". Photo: Nora Tam

Solicitors vote to unseat Law Society president Ambrose Lam

Ambrose Lam is under even greater pressure to step down after the vote of no confidence in him. Photo: Dickson Lee

Ambrose Lam is under pressure to step down. Photo: Dickson Lee

Judges don’t need to be patriots, says former top judge Andrew Li

Andrew Li has reservations over white paper. Photo: David Wong

News

Hong Kong

Law Society head's comments on Beijing's white paper followed change of attitude on Occupy Central and success in Qianhai economic zone


When Ambrose Lam San-keung was re-elected president of the Law Society in May, few would have predicted that a month later he would be at the centre of a political storm unprecedented in the history of the solicitors' body.
