Man’s bid to disqualify pro-democracy lawmakers over oath controversy fails after court rejects late payment

Eddie Chu (C) after winning the most votes across all five geographical constituencies in the September 2016 Legislative Council election. Chu is running in this weekend’s pre-elections. Photo: Reuters/Bobby Yip
Eddie Chu (C) after winning the most votes across all five geographical constituencies in the September 2016 Legislative Council election. Chu is running in this weekend’s pre-elections. Photo: Reuters/Bobby Yip

A Hong Kong man’s legal bid to disqualify pro-democracy lawmakers Eddie Chu and Cheng Chung-tai over their oaths of office has been suspended after a judge rejected the plaintiff’s second attempt to hand in his security payment.

Plaintiff Lo King-yeung accused Chu and Cheng for not taking their oaths of office “sincerely” and “solemnly”, as per an unprecedented interpretation from Beijing of the Basic Law.

The decree from the Beijing government in November has seen six opposition lawmakers disqualified from Hong Kong parliament so far, all of whom were taken to court by previous Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying and Secretary for Justice Rimsky Yuen. As a result of the lost seats, the pro-democracy camp no longer has veto power.

Chu, who won the most votes across all geographical constituents in the September election, was under scrutiny for saying, “Democratic self-determination, the tyranny will end” during his swearing-in, while Cheng called for the rewriting of the constitution.

While many speculated that the pair would be the latest legislators to be ejected from parliament, Lo failed to pay a security fee — required by any person challenging a lawmaker’s seat, as stated in section 73 of the Legislative Council Ordinance – on time.

In court last week, Lo said his original lawyer had filled in his check incorrectly, leading to the HKD20,000 payment being delayed for four months. Lo’s current lawyer, Lawrence Ma, told the High Court last Wednesday that there isn’t a clear deadline stipulated for payment in the ordinance and Lo was not familiar with the related regulations.

However, Judge Thomas Au countered that “ignorance” of legal regulations is “not a good excuse”. In court today, Au said it is “obvious” that the plaintiff had to make his payment “promptly and expeditiously”, given that chapter one of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance (IGCO) stipulates that any action has to be done without “unreasonable delay”, even if no timeline is prescribed. As a result, Au refused Lo’s late payment, effectively barring the case from proceeding.

The judge said that Lo should have made the payment quickly to avoid “prolonged uncertainty” over the legitimacy of the lawmakers, which could hinder their work in LegCo. In addition, Au ordered Lo to pay for the legislators’ legal fees.




BECOME A COCO+ MEMBER

Support local news and join a community of like-minded
“Coconauts” across Southeast Asia and Hong Kong.

Join Now
Coconuts TV
Our latest and greatest original videos
YouTube video
Subscribe on