Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T14:15:56.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constitutional Competition Between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal and the Chinese National People's Congress Standing Committee: A Game Theory Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Eric C. Ip
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The competition between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, a cosmopolitan common law supreme court, and the Chinese National People's Congress Standing Committee, a Leninist parliamentary body, over the “proper meaning” of the Hong Kong Basic Law constituted a very important facet of the territory's constitutional history since the end of British rule in 1997. This article applies the insights of game theory to explain why constitutional stability, in the sense that the two players have never entered into an open collision with each other despite the ambiguity of the Basic Law and the “One Country, Two Systems” formula, endured until the present day. It is argued that successful coordination between the two resulted from the strong aversion of the Court and the Standing Committee to constitutional crises, as well as from the fact that neither entity was capable of credibly signaling its commitment to an aggressive strategy all the time.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , Fall 2014 , pp. 824 - 848
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Baird, Douglas G., Gertner, Robert H., and Picker, Randal C. 1994. Game Theory and the Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Barton, Emily Johnston. 2002. Pricing Judicial Independence: An Empirical Study of Post‐1997 Court of Final Appeal Decisions in Hong Kong. Harvard International Law Journal 43:361–408.Google Scholar
Brown, Trevor L., and Wise, Charles R. 2004. Constitutional Courts and Legislative‐Executive Relations: The Case of Ukraine. Political Science Quarterly 119:143–169.Google Scholar
Carrubba, Clifford J., Gabel, Matthew, and Hankla, Charles 2008. Judicial Behavior Under Political Constraints: Evidence from the European Court of Justice. American Political Science Review 102 (4): 435–452.Google Scholar
Chan, Johannes. 2007. Basic Law and Constitutional Review. Hong Kong Law Journal 37:407–447.Google Scholar
Chan, Johannes 2011a. From Colony to Special Administrative Region. In Law of the Hong Kong Constitution, ed. Chan, Johannes and Lim, C. L., 5–33. Hong Kong: Sweet and Maxwell.Google Scholar
Chan, Johannes 2011b. The Judiciary. In Law of the Hong Kong Constitution, ed. Chan, Johannes and Lim, C. L., 291–318. Hong Kong: Sweet and Maxwell.Google Scholar
Chan, Johannes, and Lim, C. L. 2011. Interpreting Constitutional Rights and Permissible Restrictions. In Law of the Hong Kong Constitution, ed. Chan, Johannes and Lim, C. L., 465–509. Hong Kong: Sweet and Maxwell.Google Scholar
Chen, Albert H. Y. 2001. Another Case of Conflict Between the CFA and the NPC Standing Committee? Hong Kong Law Journal 31:179–187.Google Scholar
Chen, Albert H. Y. 2002. The Constitution and the Rule of Law. In The First Tung Chee‐hwa Administration: The First Five Years of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, ed. Kai Lau, Siu, 69–88. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
Chen, Albert H. Y. 2006. Constitutional Adjudication in Post‐1997 Hong Kong. Pacific Rim Law and Policy Journal 15:627–682.Google Scholar
Chen, Albert H. Y. 2009. The Theory, Constitution and Practice of Autonomy: The Case of Hong Kong. In One Country, Two Systems, Three Legal Orders: Perspectives of Evolution, ed. Oliveira, Jorge Costa and Cardinal, Paulo, 751–767. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer‐Verlag.Google Scholar
Chen, Albert H. Y. 2011. An Introduction to the Legal System of the People's Republic of China, 4th ed. Hong Kong: LexisNexis.Google Scholar
Cheung, Anne S. Y., and Chen, Albert H. Y. 2004. The Search for the Rule of Law in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, 1997–2003. In “One Country, Two Systems” in Crisis: Hong Kong's Transformation since the Handover, ed. Wong, Yiu‐chung, 61–93. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Cottrell, Jill, and Ghai, Yash 2001. Between Two Systems of Law: The Judiciary in Hong Kong. In Judicial Independence in the Age of Democracy: Critical Perspectives from Around the World, ed. Russell, Peter H. and David, M. O'Brien, , 207–232. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.Google Scholar
Davis, Michael C. 2007. Interpreting Constitutionalism and Democratization in Hong Kong. In Interpreting Hong Kong's Basic Law: The Struggle for Coherence, ed. Fu, Hualing, Harris, Lison, and Young, Simon N. M., 77–95. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dixit, Avinash, Skeath, Susan, and Reiley, David H. 2009. Games of Strategy, 3rd ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Dyevre, Arthur. 2011. The German Federal Constitutional Court and European Judicial Politics. West European Politics 34:346–361.Google Scholar
Elkins, Zachary, Ginsburg, Tom, and Melton, James 2009. The Endurance of National Constitutions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon. 2007. Explaining Social Behavior: More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Knight, Jack 1998. The Choices Justices Make. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Fan, Norbert C. Y. 2006. The Electoral System of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Hong Kong: Joint Publishing [Chinese].Google Scholar
Farnsworth, Ward. 2007. The Legal Analyst: A Toolkit for Thinking About the Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fu, Hualing, and Cullen, Richard 2002. National Security Law in Hong Kong: Quo Vadis—A Study of Article 23 of the Basic Law of Hong Kong. UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal 19:185–230.Google Scholar
Gan, Ching Chuan. 2009. Administrative Law and Judicialized Governance in Malaysia: The Indian Connection. In Administrative Law and Governance in Asia: Comparative Perspective, ed. Ginsburg, Tom and Chen, Albert H. Y., 257–286. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ghai, Yash. 2007. The Legal Foundations of Hong Kong's Autonomy. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration 29:3–28.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom. 2003. Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom, and McAdams, Richard H. 2004. Adjudication in Anarchy: An Expressive Theory of International Dispute Resolution. William and Mary Law Review 45:1229–1339.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom, and Moustafa, Tamir 2008. Introduction: The Function of Courts in Authoritarian Politics. In Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes, ed. Ginsburg, Tom and Moustafa, Tamir, 1–22. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, Richard, and Johnny, Mok. 2009. Judicial Review in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: LexisNexis.Google Scholar
Helmke, Gretchen. 2002. The Logic of Strategic Defection: Court‐Executive Relations in Argentina Under Dictatorship and Democracy. American Political Science Review 96:291–303.Google Scholar
Helmke, Gretchen, and Rosenbluth, Frances 2009. Regimes and the Rule of Law: Judicial Independence in Comparative Perspective. Annual Review of Political Science 12:345–366.Google Scholar
Hirschl, Ran. 2010. Constitutional Theocracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hor, Michael. 2007. Criminal Process in Hong Kong and Singapore: A Mutual Challenge. Hong Kong Law Journal 37:65–80.Google Scholar
Hou, Shumei, and Keith, Ronald 2012. China's Supreme People's Court Within the “Political‐Legal” System. In The Judicialization of Politics in Asia, ed. Dressel, Bjorn, 163–183. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ip, Eric C. 2011. A Positive Theory of Constitutional Judicial Review: Evidence from Singapore and Taiwan, Asian Journal of Law and Economics 2 (4): Article 5.Google Scholar
Ip, Eric C. 2012. Judicial Review in China: A Positive Political Economy Analysis. Review of Law and Economics 8 (2): 331–366.Google Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana. 2011. Tactical Balancing: High Court Decision‐Making on Politically Crucial Cases. Law and Society Review 45 (2): 471–506.Google Scholar
Law, David S. 2006. The Paradox of Omnipotence: Courts, Constitutions, and Commitments. Georgia Law Review 40:407–468.Google Scholar
Lee, Tahirh V. 2001. “Apres Moi Le Deluge?” Judicial Review in Hong Kong Since Britain Relinquished Sovereignty. Indiana International and Comparative Law Review 11:319–376.Google Scholar
Li, Tammy. 2011. The Contact Between Legal Interpretive Institutions of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Basic Law. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press [Chinese].Google Scholar
Liebman, Benjamin. 1998. Autonomy Through Separation? Environmental Law and the Basic Law of Hong Kong. Harvard International Law Journal 39:231–301.Google Scholar
Lin, Laifan, and Gu, Mingkang 2003. Can Courts in Hong Kong Examine the Constitutionality of the Legislative Conduct of the PRC? In Hong Kong in Transition: One Country, Two Systems, ed. Ash, Robert, Hook, Brian, and Porter, Robin, 175–191. London: Routledge Curzon.Google Scholar
Liu, Yiu‐chu. 1988. Interpretation and Review of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Journal of Chinese Law 2:49–63.Google Scholar
Lo, P. Y. 2007. Rethinking Judicial Reference: Barricades at the Gateway? In Interpreting Hong Kong's Basic Law: The Struggle for Coherence, ed. Fu, Hualing, Harris, Lison, and Young, Simon N. M., 157–182. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lo, P. Y. 2010. The Impact of CFA Jurisprudence Beyond Hong Kong. Hong Kong Lawyer 8:36–41.Google Scholar
Lo, Shiu‐hing. 2008. The Dynamics of Beijing‐Hong Kong Relations: A Model for Taiwan? Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
Ma, Ngok. 2007. Political Development in Hong Kong: State, Political Society, and Civil Society. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
Magaloni, Beatriz. 2008. Enforcing the Autocratic Political Order and the Role of the Courts: The Case of Mexico. In Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes, ed. Ginsburg, Tom and Moustafa, Tamir, 180–206. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John. 1982. Evolution and the Theory of Games. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McAdams, Richard H. 2008. Beyond Prisoners' Dilemma: Coordination, Game Theory, and the Law. Southern California Law Review 82:209–258.Google Scholar
McAdams, Richard H., and Nadler, Janice 2005. Testing the Focal Point Theory of Legal Compliance: The Effect of Third‐Party Expression in an Experimental Hawk/Dove Game. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 2:87–123.Google Scholar
Miller, James D. 2003. Game Theory at Work: How to Use Game Theory to Outthink and Outmaneuver Your Competition. New York: McGraw‐Hill.Google Scholar
Moustafa, Tamir. 2007. The Struggle for Constitutional Power: Law, Politics, and Economic Development in Egypt. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Newberg, Paula R. 2002. Judging the State: Courts and Constitutional Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ng, Tatming, and Kuan, Hsin Chi 2008. Legal Culture. In Indicators of Social Development in Hong Kong 2006, ed. Leung, Sai‐wing, Wan, Po‐san, and Wong, Siu‐lun, 25–46. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Asia‐Pacific Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Park, Jonghyun. 2008. The Judicialization of Politics in Korea. Asian‐Pacific Law and Policy Journal 10:62–113.Google Scholar
Sanchez Urribarri, Raul A. 2011. Courts Between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism: Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court. Law & Social Inquiry 36 (4): 854–884.Google Scholar
Scharpf, Fritz. 1997. Games Real Actors Play: Actor‐Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Schelling, Thomas C. 1960. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, Todd. 2002. David v. Goliath?: The Hong Kong Courts and China's National People's Congress Standing Committee. Berkeley Journal of International Law 20:575–599.Google Scholar
Shambayati, Hootan. 2008. Courts in Semi‐Democratic/Authoritarian Regimes: The Judicialization of Turkish (and Iranian) Politics. In Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regime s, ed. Ginsburg, Tom and Moustafa, Tamir, 283–303. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stearns, Maxwell L., Zywicki, Todd J., and Farber, Daniel A. 2009. Public Choice Concepts and Applications in Law. St. Paul, MN: West.Google Scholar
Tai, Benny Y. T. 2002. Chapter 1 of Hong Kong's New Constitution: Constitutional Positioning and Repositioning. In Crisis and Transformation in China's Hong Kong, ed. Chan, Ming K. and So, Alvin Y., 189–219. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Tai, Benny Y. T. 2007. Basic Law, Basic Politics: The Constitutional Game of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Law Journal 37:503–578.Google Scholar
Tai, Benny Y. T. 2011. The Constitutional Game of Article 158 (3) of the Basic Law. Hong Kong Law Journal 41:377–384.Google Scholar
Tam, Waikeung. 2010. Political Transition and the Rise of Cause Lawyering: The Case of Hong Kong. Law & Social Inquiry 35:663–687.Google Scholar
Tanner, Murray Scott. 1999. The Politics of Lawmaking in Post‐Mao China. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tezcur, Gunes Murat. 2009. Judicial Activism in Perilous Times: The Turkish Case. Law & Society Review 43:305–336.Google Scholar
Trochev, Alexei. 2008. Judging Russia: Constitutional Court in Russian Politics, 1990–2006. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wang, Zhenmin. 2007. From the Judicial Committee of the British Privy Council to the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People's Congress: An Evaluation of the Legal Interpretive System After the Handover. Hong Kong Law Journal 37:605–618.Google Scholar
Wesley‐Smith, Peter. 1994. Constitutional and Administrative Law in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Longman.Google Scholar
Wesley‐Smith, Peter 2001. Individual and Institutional Independence of the Judiciary. In Judicial Independence and the Rule of Law in Hong Kong, ed. Tsang, Steve, 99–131. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Mark. 2005. Competition Policy and Law in China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wu, Jianfan. 1988. Several Issues Concerning the Relationship Between the Central Government of the People's Republic of China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Journal of Chinese Law 2:64–82.Google Scholar
Wydick, Bruce. 2008. Games in Economic Development. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Xiao, Weiyun. 2003. On the Hong Kong Basic Law. Beijing: Peking University Press [Chinese].Google Scholar
Yap, Po Jen. 2007. 10 Years of the Basic Law: The Rise, Retreat and Resurgence of Judicial Power in Hong Kong. Commonwealth Law World Review 36:166–191.Google Scholar
Yap, Po Jen 2011. Democratic Republic of the Congo v. FG Hemisphere: Why Absolute Immunity Should Apply But a Reference Was Unnecessary. Hong Kong Law Journal 41:393–400.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Democratic Republic of the Congo and Others v FG Hemisphere Associates LLC (2011) 14 H.K.C.F.A.R. 95.Google Scholar
Director of Immigration v. Chong Fung Yuen (2001) 4 H.K.C.F.A.R. 211.Google Scholar
H.K.S.A.R. v. David Ma (1997) H.K.L.R.D. 76.Google Scholar
H.K.S.A.R. v. Ng Kung Siu & Anor. (1999) 2 H.K.C.F.A.R. 442.Google Scholar
Koo Sze Yiu & Anor. v. Chief Executive of the H.K.S.A.R. (2006) 9 H.K.C.F.A.R. 441.Google Scholar
Koon Wing Yee & Anor. v. Insider Dealing Tribunal & Anor. (2008) 11 H.K.C.F.A.R. 170.Google Scholar
Leung Kwok Hung & Ors. v. H.K.S.A.R. (2005) 8 H.K.C.F.A.R. 229.Google Scholar
Mok Charles Peter v. Tam Wai Ho & Anor. (2010) 13 H.K.C.F.A.R. 762.Google Scholar
Ng Ka Ling & Ors. v. Director of Immigration (1999) 2 H.K.C.F.A.R. 4.Google Scholar
Ng Ka Ling v. Director of Immigration (No. 2) (1999) 2 H.K.C.F.A. 141.Google Scholar
Secretary for Justice & Ors. v. Chan Wah & Ors. (2000) 3 H.K.C.F.A.R. 459.Google Scholar
Secretary for Justice v. Yau Yuk Lung & Anor. (2007) 10 H.K.C.F.A.R. 335.Google Scholar
Secretary for Security v. Sakthevel Prabakar (2004) 7 H.K.C.F.A.R. 187.Google Scholar
Solicitor v. Law Society of Hong Kong (2003) 6 H.K.C.F.A.R. 570.Google Scholar
Yeung May Wan & Ors. v. H.K.S.A.R. (2005) 8 H.K.C.F.A.R. 137.Google Scholar
Democratic Republic of the Congo and Others v FG Hemisphere Associates LLC (2011) 14 H.K.C.F.A.R. 95.Google Scholar
Director of Immigration v. Chong Fung Yuen (2001) 4 H.K.C.F.A.R. 211.Google Scholar
H.K.S.A.R. v. David Ma (1997) H.K.L.R.D. 76.Google Scholar
H.K.S.A.R. v. Ng Kung Siu & Anor. (1999) 2 H.K.C.F.A.R. 442.Google Scholar
Koo Sze Yiu & Anor. v. Chief Executive of the H.K.S.A.R. (2006) 9 H.K.C.F.A.R. 441.Google Scholar
Koon Wing Yee & Anor. v. Insider Dealing Tribunal & Anor. (2008) 11 H.K.C.F.A.R. 170.Google Scholar
Leung Kwok Hung & Ors. v. H.K.S.A.R. (2005) 8 H.K.C.F.A.R. 229.Google Scholar
Mok Charles Peter v. Tam Wai Ho & Anor. (2010) 13 H.K.C.F.A.R. 762.Google Scholar
Ng Ka Ling & Ors. v. Director of Immigration (1999) 2 H.K.C.F.A.R. 4.Google Scholar
Ng Ka Ling v. Director of Immigration (No. 2) (1999) 2 H.K.C.F.A. 141.Google Scholar
Secretary for Justice & Ors. v. Chan Wah & Ors. (2000) 3 H.K.C.F.A.R. 459.Google Scholar
Secretary for Justice v. Yau Yuk Lung & Anor. (2007) 10 H.K.C.F.A.R. 335.Google Scholar
Secretary for Security v. Sakthevel Prabakar (2004) 7 H.K.C.F.A.R. 187.Google Scholar
Solicitor v. Law Society of Hong Kong (2003) 6 H.K.C.F.A.R. 570.Google Scholar
Yeung May Wan & Ors. v. H.K.S.A.R. (2005) 8 H.K.C.F.A.R. 137.Google Scholar

United States

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).Google Scholar
Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989).Google Scholar

Statutes Cited

Immigration (Amendment) No. 2 Ordinance (1997).Google Scholar
Immigration (Amendment) No. 3 Ordinance (1997).Google Scholar
National Flag and National Emblem Ordinance (1997).Google Scholar
Immigration (Amendment) No. 2 Ordinance (1997).Google Scholar
Immigration (Amendment) No. 3 Ordinance (1997).Google Scholar
National Flag and National Emblem Ordinance (1997).Google Scholar

China

Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China. Adopted on April 4, 1990 by the Seventh National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China at its Third Session.Google Scholar
Constitution of the People's Republic of China. Adopted at the Fifth Session of the Fifth National People's Congress on December 4, 1982 and at the First Session of the Eighth National People's Congress on March 29, 1993.Google Scholar
Decision Approving the “Amendment to Annex I to the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China Concerning the Method for the Selection of the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.” Adopted by the Standing Committee of the Eleventh National People's Congress at its Sixteenth Session on August 28, 2010.Google Scholar
Decision on Issues Relating to the Methods for Selecting the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and for Forming the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the Year 2012 and on Issues Relating to Universal Suffrage. Adopted by the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress at its Thirty‐First Session on December 29, 2007.Google Scholar
Decision on Issues Relating to the Methods for Selecting the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the Year 2007 and for Forming the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the Year 2008. Adopted by the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress at its Ninth Session on April 26, 2004.Google Scholar
Interpretation of Article 7 of Annex I and Article III of Annex II to the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China. Adopted by the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress at its Eighth Session on April 6, 2004.Google Scholar
Interpretation of Article 53(2) of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. Adopted at the Fifteenth Session of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress on April 27, 2005.Google Scholar
Interpretation of Articles 22(4) and 22(2)(3) of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China. Adopted by the Standing Committee of the Ninth National People's Congress at its Tenth Session on June 26, 1999.Google Scholar
Interpretation of Paragraph 1, Article 13 and Article 19 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. Adopted by the Standing Committee of the Eleventh National People's Congress at its Twenty‐Second Session on August 26, 2011.Google Scholar
Joint Declaration of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Question of Hong Kong, U.K.‐China, Dec. 19, 1984, 1399 U.N.T.S. 61.Google Scholar
National Flag Law of the People's Republic of China. Adopted at the Fourteenth Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Seventh National People's Congress on June 28, 1990 and promulgated by Order No. 28 of the President of the People's Republic of China on June 28, 1990.Google Scholar

Primary Sources

Anson, Chan, “Statement of the Acting Chief Executive” (January 30, 1999).Google Scholar
“Deng Xiaoping's Remarks to Members of the Committee for Drafting the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Who Were Attending its Ninth Plenary Meeting” (February 17, 1990).Google Scholar
“Deng Xiaoping's Speech at a Meeting with the Members of the Committee for Drafting the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region” (April 16, 1987).Google Scholar
Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, “Assessment of Service Implication in Relation to the Judgment of the Court of Final Appeal on the Right of Abode Issue Tabled at the Legislative Council” (6 May 1999).Google Scholar
LaFraniere, Sharon, “Mainland Chinese Flock to Hong Kong to Give Birth,” New York Times (February 22, 2012).Google Scholar
The Liberal Party, “Statement: Focus on Collective Drive” (February 5, 1999).Google Scholar
“Lu, Ping Criticizes Ng Ka Ling Ruling: The Mainland Departments Cannot Control the Situation,” Hong Kong Economic Times (March 6, 1999).Google Scholar
“Speech of the Spokesman for the Legislative Affairs Commission of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress Concerning the Judgment of the Court of Final Appeal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region,” Wen Wei Po (February 26, 1999).Google Scholar