Conflict in Interpretation? The Definition and Application of Article 22 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

Abstract

In April 2020, a debate broke out over whether the Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (LOCPG HK) and the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council (HKMAO) have the authority to comment on Hong Kong's Legislative Council affairs under Article 22 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR. In response to this debate and to review the divergent interpretations of Article 22 of the Basic Law by China mainland and Hong Kong commentators, this research examines the legislative history, original intention of Article 22, and its relationship with relevant Chinese law and policies. It argues that the LOCPG HK and the HKMAO are not subject to Article 22 of the Basic Law. Furthermore, these agencies' involvement in Hong Kong issues should be regarded as exercising their lawful authority to supervise Hong Kong's internal affairs rather than as "interference". It advocates that to reduce the conflict in interpretation between Mainland and Hong Kong legal communities, textual analysis, systematic content analysis, and the Chinese legal system should be the bases of future interpretation and application of the Hong Kong Basic Law.