The chairperson of the House Committee of the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is to be elected by and among LegCo members. Dennis Kwok Wing-hang of the Civic Party has presided over 14 House Committee meetings without facilitating the election of a new chairperson since LegCo resumed business in October. The legislature has been in a long deadlock over the election of a head of its House Committee for six months — an unprecedented man-made delay.

Under Article 73(7) of the Basic Law of Hong Kong, LegCo is given the power to endorse the appointment of Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung as the chief judge of the Court of Final Appeal, which was expected to be done on March 24. On that day, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor urged LegCo to elect a House Committee chairperson as soon as possible, so the appointment of the new judicial head can be endorsed in a timely manner. Lawmakers such as Priscilla Leung Mei-fun have warned that if the appointment fails to secure LegCo endorsement before its current session ends in July, a smooth handover of judicial duties between the outgoing and incoming chief judge of the Court of Final Appeal could be jeopardized. In other words, if filibustering stunts to delay the election of the new chairperson of the House Committee are allowed to continue, normal operations of the judiciary will be disrupted.

In total disregard of the importance of smooth judicial succession, Kwok stands in the way of the executive branch, the judiciary and the legislature of the SAR. Does such despotic behavior concur with democratic principles?

The election of a chairperson for the House Committee was supposed to be done in no more than 30 minutes during the committee’s first meeting. The House Committee would then be able to carry on its business, including reviewing bills and subsidiary legislation before the resumption of their second reading in LegCo. Yet, under the direction of Kwok, the House Committee has been in a state of paralysis for more than six months.

On April 13, the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office and the Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government in the HKSAR issued statements separately, rightly condemning opposition lawmakers for maliciously filibustering against the election of a chairperson for the House Committee. The two central government agencies lashed out without pulling any punches: “One can’t help but think their behavior constitutes a breach of the (Legislative Council) oath, as well as misconduct in public office.”

Kwok wasted no time in dismissing the statements of the two central government agencies, arguing that they “have no authority” to make such comments. It might have surprised few people that Kwok had the guts to challenge the two central government agencies’ power, but what on earth has prompted him to conclude that the two agencies tasked with overseeing Hong Kong affairs need anyone’s permission to warn about the abnormal maneuvers and disruptions in LegCo?

On April 14, Kwok argued: “I have heard nothing about my infringement of the Rules of Procedure as well as the oaths and declarations.” But the reality is: LegCo is nearly in a state of paralysis because of their filibustering tactics! Perhaps Kwok should realize a distinction can be observed between the origin of the Rules of Procedure, which is rooted in UK history, and the LegCo oath. The former is a legacy of the legislature’s history, while the latter reads (that those who take their oaths) “being a member of the Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, I will uphold the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, bear allegiance to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and serve the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region conscientiously, dutifully, in full accordance with the law, honestly and with integrity.”

If I remember correctly, I first bumped into Kwok inside a courtroom in the Court of Final Appeal Building in a criminal appeal case concerning the onus of proof in the context of a dangerous drug trafficking case when he was a promising solicitor-turned-counsel in the second half of his pupilage. Ten or so years later, he is a barrister-turned high-profile politician.

Kwok is now at the center of a major controversy involving the judicial, executive, legislative and political areas. He needs to think very carefully before picking an opponent that happens to be a nation.

The author is a barrister and vice-chairman of Hong Kong Legal Exchange Foundation.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.