Beijing fear in Hong Kong maids ruling

Last Updated: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 21:53:00 +1000

A Hong Kong court says a ban on foreign maids from settling permanently in the territory is unconstitutional. Its ruling could rock the legal boat on which the city-state is founded.

The case could even go back to the National People's Congress in Beijing, although that, top lawyer Alan Leong told Radio Australia's Asia Pacific, is something neither the Hong Kong government nor its citizens want to see happen.

A Filipino maid who has lived in Hong Kong since 1986 found that she was barred by immigration laws from settling permanently. The law affects domestic workers, mostly from the Philippines and Indonesia.

Foreigners can apply to settle in Hong Kong after seven years of uninterrupted residency, but maids were specifically excluded.

Violate

Now the territory High Court has ruled those barriers violate Hong Kong's mini-constitution, the Basic Law.

When China resumed sovereignty over the British-controlled territory in 1997, Hong Kong kept a high degree of self-rule, a point enshrined in the Basic Law.

Mr Leong, a senior counsel and member of Hong Kong's parliament, the Legislative Council, does not expect a sudden influx of foreign migrants.

The lawyer, who also leads the Civic Party, explains that any non-Chinese who wants the right of abode in Hong Kong has to pass "two hurdles": first, show they have "been ordinarily resident in Hong Kong for a continuous period of no less than seven years.

"He has also to prove to the satisfaction of the Hong Kong Immigration Authority that he has taken Hong Kong as his place of permanent residence."

The High Court ruled an immigration provision that prevented periods of domestic service from adding up to a total seven years was unconstitutional.

Chief Executive Donald Tsang has said he is disappointed by the judgement, and Mr Leong expects the government to appeal.

"Counsel representing the government already told the first judge . . . that the matter would have to go further, meaning go to appeal," he said.

Reserve

"They would reserve the right to refer to the 1999 National People's Congress Standing Committee's interpretation of Article 24 of the Basic Law."

Reinterpretation of the Basic Law can be seen as going back to Beijing.

The counsel says: "Well, this is a thing that most Hong Kong people would not want to see happen. We do not want the National People's Congress Standing Committee to yet again interpret our Basic Law."

In fact, Mr Leong said, the government seems to have changed its mind about reinterpretation. It "has been telling us that there is an array of administrative measures that they are keeping up their sleeves to deal with the situation, and they would not now consider referring the matter to the NPC Standing Committee for any interpretation."

If there a possibility of Hong Kong experiencing an influx of foreign migrants?

"Our analysis of the law would in fact draw the conclusion that this would not happen because the Immigration Department and the government would have enough powers within their disposal to stop such a thing from happening."

He expects the administration to ask the court to suspend the ruling, pending an appeal. "That will take maybe a year or so," Mr Leong said.

Language News