scholarly journals The Democracy Dichotomy: Framing the Hong Kong 2019 Street Protests as Legitimacy Counterclaims against an Incoherent Constitutional Morality

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-62
Author(s):  
James Greenwood-Reeves
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Moral Authority ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
Mutual Legal Assistance ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Constitutional Morality

This article evaluates the 2019 street protests in Hong Kong following the proposal of the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019, in light of the constitutional settlement of the region. Firstly, it examines the ‘constitutional morality’ of Hong Kong, that is, the moral principles underlying its foundational claims to moral authority. Secondly it analyses whether the Administration’s ‘legitimacy claims’ – its rational-normative arguments for obedience to law – follow from these constitutional moral principles. Concluding that the legitimacy claims of the Administration pursuant to the Bill proved morally unintelligible, this research finds that protest action by citizens was a logical and rational response to a perceived legitimacy claim failure. It suggests that similar protests are likely to occur for the foreseeable future given the instability of the region’s constitutional morality.

scholarly journals The Controversy of the Amendment of Anti-Extradition in Hong Kong-Threat to the people of Hong Kong

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 133-142
Author(s):  
Yu-Han Chen
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Personal Safety ◽  
Mutual Legal Assistance ◽  
The People ◽  
Financial Center ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
High Degree ◽  
International Financial Center

Abstract The purpose of this article was to analyze the amendment of Fugitive Offenders Ordinance & Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Ordinance, which caused widespread controversy in Hong Kong recently. This amendment stemmed from a murder case that occurred in Taiwan, which led the Hong Kong government to decide to fill the legal loopholes in the extradition law. The amendment abolished the prohibition of extradition of China and made the fundamental changes to the vetting procedure for extradition. However, based on the question to the judicial environment in China and the unequal relationship between Hong Kong and China, many Hong Kong people believed that the amendment would seriously threaten their personal safety. The amendment mattered important because people it affected were not only Hong Kong citizens, but also foreigners staying in Hong Kong. And as an important international financial center, the influence of Hong Kong couldn’t be underestimated. Therefore, the amendment had triggered a high degree of international concern. This article will analyze the contents of the amendment and the supports and the oppositions to clarify the dispute and discuss whether the amendment is good or bad.

The Request for Mutual Assistance and the European Investigation Order – Is the Modern Legal Assistance Instrument Better than its Predecessor

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-216
Author(s):  
Georgia Papucharova
Keyword(s):  
European Convention ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Mutual Legal Assistance ◽  
Mutual Assistance ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
International Response ◽  
Criminal Matters

AbstractEuropean evidence law is a quite sensitive topic and has always been the cause of much debate by practitioners and academics. Theoretical and physical borders do not matter for transnational crime. The intensive mobility of people and the evolution of world trade with goods and services create favorable conditions for the cross-border crime to develop. Therefore, it is of a great importance to take far-reaching steps to an upgraded mechanism for obtaining evidence in and from the Member States. This article examines the application of two mutual legal assistance instruments – the request for mutual assistance, which was established by the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of 1959, the EU Mutual Legal Assistance Convention of2000 with its 2001 Protocol, and Arts. 48 to 53 of the Schengen Agreement, and the European Investigation Order introduced by the Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters. The main objective of this research is to emphasize the advantages and disadvantages of both judicial cooperation mechanisms. A comparative analysis of both operational tools is an appropriate way to assess which one is related to more procedural savings and how both of them deal with the protection of human rights. Thus, the modern instruments for judicial cooperation in the area of transnational evidence-gathering as an international response to crimes with cross-border dimensions can be adequately valued.

Problems Related to the Practical Implementation of the Treaty of Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Republic of Bulgaria and People’s Republic of China

De Jure ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitar Mladenov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
Mutual Legal Assistance ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Autonomous Regions ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Criminal Matters

The article addresses various problems in the practical implementation of the Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Republic of Bulgaria and the People’s Republic of China. These include way of execution, proofs, centralized communication, special autonomous regions of China, political crimes, etc. from a Bulgarian perspective.

scholarly journals Historical aspects of development of the institution of legal assistance between states in criminal matters in the Republic of Azerbaijan

2021 ◽  
pp. 48-60
Author(s):  
Matanat Pasha Askerova
Keyword(s):  
Intergovernmental Relations ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Mutual Legal Assistance ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Bilateral Agreements ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Criminal Matters

The subject of this research is the historical-legal grounds of rendering mutual legal assistance in the Republic of Azerbaijan. Research methodology is comprised of formal-legal, comparative-legal, and historical-legal methods. Normative framework is formed by the Constitution, provisions of the criminal procedure legislation and laws, international acts acceded by the Republic of Azerbaijan, which regulate mutual legal assistance issues. Objective: to develop proposals for improving the Institute of mutual legal Assistance. assistance in criminal matters based on the historical experience in this field. The research results are as follows: mutual legal assistance has evolved from elementary extradition of fugitive serfs, one-time provision of diplomatic assistance to institutionalized legal assistance based on multilateral and bilateral agreements; from the absence of  legislative framework to codification; from inclusion of separate norms on certain aspects of the agreement on friendly relations, peace, cooperation or even submission to conclusion of special bilateral agreements. The acquired results can be implemented in intergovernmental relations regulation of rendering mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. The novelty of this research consists in consideration of legal assistance based on the historical-normative acts of the Republic of Azerbaijan. The following conclusions were made: in some historical periods, legal assistance included such institutions as the presence of state representative of the accused in administration of justice against a foreigner, unconditional extradition of criminals who committed grave crime, stiff punishment of those reluctant to peace, elimination from jurisdiction of certain criminals, transfer of prosecution, etc. can still be currently used to regulate or improve the institution of legal assistance in criminal matters, including reasonable terms for submitting court requests. For example, a reasonable term for criminal proceedings is one of the guarantees of effective legal proceedings, the violation of which also entails an infringement of such a fundamental right to fairness of proceedings.

Netherlands-United States: Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance

1982 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-57
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Mutual Legal Assistance ◽  
Mutual Assistance ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
Statutory Authority ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Criminal Matters

With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance between the United States of America and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, together with a related exchange of notes, signed at The Hague on June 12,1981.I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, the report of the Department of State with respect to the treaty.The treaty is one of a series of modern mutual assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States. The treaty is self-executing and utilizes existing statutory authority.The new treaty provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the treaty includes: (1) executing requests relating to criminal matters; (2) taking of testimony or statements of persons; (3) effecting the production, preservation, and authentication of documents, records, or articles of evidence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document