The Registration of Same-Sex Partnerships Bill, introduced by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government, is a reasoned and necessary measure that reflects a deep commitment to legal integrity, administrative competence, and the preservation of traditional values. The bill does not endorse same-sex marriage in any form. Instead, it is a measured administrative response to the Court of Final Appeal’s declaration in the 2023 Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit’s case, in which the court concluded that the government has a “positive obligation” to establish an alternative framework for legal recognition of same-sex partnerships formed overseas. This legislative move is not about redefining marriage or importing foreign values. It is a precise legal response that respects judicial authority, supports effective governance and upholds the established family structure rooted in Hong Kong’s social and cultural traditions.
The government has acted with prudence and constitutional fidelity by proposing a registration mechanism that provides limited legal recognition to same-sex relationships registered abroad, without altering the essence of marriage as defined under domestic law. The Marriage Ordinance continues to embody the traditional understanding of a union between a man and a woman, and this bill does not seek to challenge that framework. Instead, it addresses practical administrative concerns that have arisen from a legal vacuum which, if left unaddressed, would harm the orderly functioning of public institutions. The bill allows for the necessary recognition of certain rights related to medical decision-making and post-death arrangements, ensuring that public officials can carry out their duties with consistency and legal clarity.
By introducing this proposal, the government demonstrates its profound respect for the Judiciary and its unwavering commitment to upholding the principles of constitutionalism. The rule of law cannot be selectively followed. The court, having issued a binding judgment, required a legal response. By providing one that is both legally precise and socially conservative, the government has demonstrated a high level of institutional maturity. It has not politicized the issue or attempted to provoke ideological division. Instead, it has shown what responsible governance entails in a complex and plural society. This is a testament to the resilience and adaptability of the HKSAR’s legal system under the overarching sovereignty of the People’s Republic of China.
The Registration of Same-Sex Partnerships Bill is a product of legal necessity, administrative rationality, and cultural continuity. It respects the judgment of the court, ensures the smooth operation of government services, and maintains the traditional definition of marriage
This legislative measure is also essential for the smooth operation of daily administrative functions. Without a registration framework, hospitals, courts and government departments are left in an untenable position when dealing with cases involving same-sex couples married abroad. In urgent medical situations or matters involving inheritance and funeral arrangements, the lack of legal recognition introduces uncertainty and delay, which can have serious consequences for all parties involved. The bill eliminates this uncertainty by introducing a mechanism that allows government entities to act within a clear legal framework. It is not about redefining social norms but enabling the machinery of government to function effectively in circumstances where such partnerships already exist elsewhere.
The proposal also reflects Hong Kong’s distinctive constitutional character. As a city governed under the principle of “one country, two systems”, Hong Kong possesses a legal system that must balance traditional Chinese values with the operational realities of an international financial and service hub. This registration mechanism is not about mirroring foreign liberal models. Instead, it is about managing the administrative presence of foreign legal realities without compromising domestic values. The bill does not create new rights or categories; it simply provides limited recognition to legal facts that originate outside the jurisdiction. This represents a responsible and restrained use of legislative authority, maintaining Hong Kong’s autonomy while respecting its international obligations.
Equally important is the bill’s role in preserving the social cohesion of Hong Kong society. The government has wisely chosen not to pursue same-sex marriage legislation or introduce any form of local civil union arrangement. That path would have caused significant social division, ignited cultural anxieties and disrupted the delicate balance that currently exists between different generations, faith communities and political constituencies. Instead, the government has introduced a modest proposal that alleviates administrative difficulties without triggering ideological conflict. It is a pragmatic solution that protects societal harmony while fulfilling its duty.
The bill also avoids the pitfalls of moral subjectivism and ideological confrontation by keeping the focus on administrative functionality. It does not elevate individual identity claims above institutional needs. Instead, it affirms that the government has a duty to maintain order, clarity and fairness in the execution of public responsibilities. This is especially vital in areas such as healthcare and social services, where ambiguity over legal status can have real and immediate human costs. The bill ensures that such ambiguity is removed in a manner that does not compromise the cultural consensus surrounding the institution of marriage.
The government’s approach reflects an advanced understanding of its responsibilities within the framework of national sovereignty. It demonstrates that Hong Kong can respond to legal imperatives in a manner consistent with its cultural foundations and the broader values upheld by the nation, of which Hong Kong is a part. By choosing not to legislate same-sex marriage and instead adopting a registration system for overseas unions, the government preserves the integrity of the traditional family model that remains central to both Chinese society and the social expectations of the Hong Kong community. This direction affirms a commitment to lawful governance while remaining attuned to the values shared across the country.
The bill also supports Hong Kong’s international standing as a jurisdiction that respects its courts and adheres to the principles of the SAR’s lawful governance. The Registration of Same-Sex Partnerships Bill enables the government to fulfil its obligations without compromising domestic legislative autonomy. It shows respect to the court while maintaining the legislative prerogative not to redefine marriage. This is a model of how legal systems rooted in traditional values can engage with modern legal challenges without losing their cultural anchoring.
Furthermore, the bill reflects a careful and strategic separation between recognition and endorsement. It does not imply approval or celebration of same-sex marriage. It merely acknowledges the legal existence of foreign unions for administrative efficiency. This distinction is not semantic but substantive. It allows public institutions to perform their functions without opening the door to broader legal reforms that the population has not consented to.
The Registration of Same-Sex Partnerships Bill is a product of legal necessity, administrative rationality, and cultural continuity. It respects the judgment of the court, ensures the smooth operation of government services, and maintains the traditional definition of marriage. It is a proposal of legal clarity and social restraint, one that honors the principle of the SAR’s lawful governance while affirming the values of the Chinese nation.
The author is a solicitor, a Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area lawyer, and a China-appointed attesting officer.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
