On Oct 16, the chief justice, Andrew Cheung Kui-nung, welcomed the acceptance by the chief executive of the recommendation of the Judicial Officers Recommendation Commission on the appointment of Sir Terence Arnold as a nonpermanent judge (NPJ) from another common law jurisdiction of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (CFA).

Arnold’s expected appointment will bring the number of overseas NPJs to six, and the CFA’s total complement will rise to 14 (including the chief justice). This, the Judiciary explained, “will provide greater flexibility in dealing with the caseload of the Court of Final Appeal”. As a former justice of the Supreme Court of New Zealand and an ex-solicitor general, Arnold will bring considerable experience to bear, and the legal world will welcome his arrival.

When the CFA determines an appeal, it comprises five judges. They invariably include the chief justice, three permanent judges, and either a Hong Kong NPJ or an NPJ from another common law jurisdiction. Since 1997, local judges have benefited greatly from the perspectives overseas NPJs have provided (including those, like Arnold, from New Zealand).

The two most senior overseas NPJs are the United Kingdom’s Lords (Leonard) Hoffmann and (David) Neuberger. They were appointed long before the enactment of the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL) in June 2020. Whereas Hoffmann was appointed in 1998 and Neuberger in 2009, their three-year terms have been routinely extended. Although, like other overseas NPJs, they faced pressure from Beijing-hostile forces in the UK to resign from the CFA because of the NSL, they refused. Instead, they adhered to their oaths of office and remained loyal to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, for which they are owed a debt of gratitude.

The pressures they faced were not inconsiderable, and came from various sources. To their eternal shame, leaders of the UK’s Conservative Party led the charge, disregarding judicial independence. They undoubtedly imagined that undermining the CFA would destabilize the “one country, two systems” framework and weaken China.

For example, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, who led the Conservative Party from 2001 to 2003, called for the positions of all the CFA’s overseas judges to be reviewed in September 2020. He claimed that, whereas judges in the UK and Australia were “free to reach decisions without fear or favor”, this was “not the case in Hong Kong”.

This was as foul a calumny as can be imagined, not least because Hong Kong has one of the most professional judiciaries in the Asia-Pacific region. However, it did not deter another future Conservative Party leader, Liz Truss, from peddling a similar fallacy in March, 2022 (while foreign secretary). She claimed it was “no longer tenable” for serving British judges to sit on the CFA, as it risked “legitimizing oppression”.

Although two NPJs heeded Truss’ words and quit the CFA, everybody who believed in the rule of law was appalled. Throughout the common law world, political pressure on judges is abhorrent. Even former Hong Kong governor Chris Patten deplored Truss’ “damaging” remarks, saying, “I thoroughly disapprove of politicians telling judges what to do”.

When the then-Conservative Party leader (and prime minister) Boris Johnson learned that the two judges were resigning, he welcomed their departures. Even though he must have known that any weakening of the CFA was bad for the rule of law in the SAR, he said: “I appreciate, and I understand their position”.

If nothing else, this squalid episode showed that the rule of law is more secure in the SAR, where judicial independence is constitutionally protected, than it is in England and Wales.

However, despite the shenanigans of Duncan Smith, Truss and Johnson, the CFA has not only survived but gone from strength to strength. It has continued to recruit overseas NPJs of the highest quality, and its jurisprudence remains second to none.

Indeed, the latest overseas NPJs have had no difficulty in seeing through the myths peddled in the West about the SAR’s national security legislation. They know it is not only human-rights heavy but also aligned with parallel laws in their own countries. They appreciate that the CFA’s role is to interpret the laws fairly, and to ensure just outcomes — which was why they accepted their appointments.

In 2023, Patrick Keane, a former justice of the High Court of Australia and ex-chief justice of the country’s Federal Court, joined the CFA as an overseas NPJ (the first recruit since the enactment of the NSL). In 2024, the year the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance was enacted, James Allsop, a former president of the New South Wales Court of Appeal and, like Keane, an ex-chief justice of the Federal Court of Australia, also joined the CFA. In 2025, Sir William Young, previously the president of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand and formerly a permanent justice of the country’s Supreme Court, became the latest overseas NPJ. These recruits are the ultimate riposte to those in the UK who tried to gut the CFA after the NSL’s enactment.

With the anticipated arrival of Sir Terence Arnold, the NPJs from other common law jurisdictions will comprise two from Australia, two from New Zealand and two from the UK. They are exactly the globally minded jurists the SAR needs as it consolidates its legal prowess and spreads its wings internationally.

Moreover, since Anglo-Chinese relations have improved with the election of a Labour government in the UK in 2024, there is no reason other eminent British jurists should not join Hoffmann and Neuberger as overseas NPJs. After all, Sir Brian Keith, formerly a judge of the High Court of England and Wales, is currently presiding over the Abby Choi Tin-fung murder trial, and King’s Counsel from London regularly appear in Hong Kong courts (including the CFA). Given the UK’s historic links with Hong Kong, there must be many retired jurists who, like Keith, would jump at the opportunity to continue their judicial careers in the SAR, and nobody could blame them.

Like their local counterparts, overseas NPJs are resolute and can be relied upon to administer justice without fear or favor. They are also courageous and will not allow themselves to be intimidated by anti-China elements. This bodes well for the future of the rule of law in the SAR.

The author is a senior counsel and law professor, and was previously the director of public prosecutions of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.