Twenty-one years ago today, the central government officially resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong. Over the past 21 years, Hong Kong's development has not only benefited from the institutional arrangements of the "one country, two systems" policy but is also closely related to its history and reality of a high degree of legalization. Today, the editor will briefly introduce Hong Kong's judicial system to reflect the level of rule of law in Hong Kong from a different perspective.
 

The Hong Kong lawyer system retains the split profession under the common law system. In mainland China, when we refer to a legal practitioner as a "barrister," it is mostly to show respect for the legal profession or to compliment the lawyer personally. However, in Hong Kong, "barrister" is a formal title for a lawyer, and solicitors and barristers are actually two distinct professions. Barristers, also known as "advocates," specialize in courtroom litigation and defense, have full speaking rights in court, can represent clients in hearings in all Hong Kong courts, and may be hired to provide professional opinions on litigation-related issues (such as whether to file a case) or other specialized legal matters. Unlike barristers, "solicitors" focus on non-litigation work or some litigation tasks, but their speaking rights in court are restricted, and they can only appear in certain specific lower-level courts.

　　Hong Kong courts

Magistrates' Courts handle mainly criminal cases, including summary offenses (equivalent to private criminal prosecutions in mainland China) and indictable offenses. All criminal proceedings begin in the Magistrates' Courts.

District Courts have criminal and civil jurisdiction. In criminal matters, District Courts hear cases with a maximum sentence of up to 7 years' imprisonment, excluding serious crimes like murder. In civil matters, they handle disputes involving contracts, torts, and land claims with amounts ranging from over HKD 50,000 to a maximum of HKD 1,000,000.

The High Court consists of the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal. The Court of First Instance has both appellate and original jurisdiction. Its appellate jurisdiction includes criminal appeals from the Magistrates' Courts, while its original jurisdiction allows it to hear serious criminal cases and all civil cases as a court of first instance. The Court of Appeal hears criminal and civil appeals from the Court of First Instance and the District Courts.

The Court of Final Appeal is the highest court in Hong Kong, established on July 1, 1997, replacing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council under the British Hong Kong government. It handles appeals against civil and criminal judgments from the High Court and other matters. The Court of Final Appeal hears significant legal issues involving major public affairs and constitutional questions.

　　How judges are selected in Hong Kong

Over 90% of judges in Hong Kong are chosen from among barristers, with at least five years of practice experience, and most have more than five years. The higher the court level, the greater the judge's competence, qualifications, and prestige, forming a pyramid-like structure.

　　How court trials are conducted in Hong Kong and the neutrality of judges

Common law is a systematic legal system developed from countless cases. Trials follow an adversarial system, ensuring equality between the prosecution and defense. Judges are neutral and passive, not directly involved in investigations, which positively contributes to ensuring fairness. During trials, the judge sits in the center of the bench, with lawyers from both sides seated at a long table in front of the judge. The defendant does not sit in the center facing the judge, as that would imply guilt, but stands to the side. The judge focuses solely on listening to evidence and arguments from both sides to render a verdict.

Judges have no privileges, only social status. Several years ago, in a criminal case in Hong Kong, the judge suddenly received a letter during the trial. Without reading it, but sensing it was related to the case, he became very upset and called the lawyers from both sides into his office. He told them he had received a letter but had not opened it. In Hong Kong, for all criminal cases, police must attend court, and the supervising police officer must sit in the back to assist the prosecution. During the hearing, the judge announced he had received the letter and handed it to the police prosecutor. The judge understood that he must be very cautious about anyone attempting to communicate with him. Do barristers communicate with judges during trials? Yes. Why? For example, when a case reaches its final stage and a closing submission is needed, the submission is usually written down, submitted to the judge and the opposing side, exchanged between both parties, and sent to the court. A letter is written and given to the judge's clerk, who first reviews it before passing it to the judge. All communication between lawyers and judges goes through the clerk. Therefore, when a judge receives a letter, especially one related to the court or the judge's role, they are very cautious. If there is any doubt, the matter is made public, allowing both sides to know, increasing transparency. This fosters greater trust and integrity.
 

　　假 发

In Hong Kong legal dramas, we often see judges or lawyers wearing wigs. So why do they wear wigs? What is the significance of the wig? The wig is white, parted in the middle, and made of circular curls. There are two types of wigs: one long enough to reach the shoulders, worn for special events such as the annual legal year opening ceremony; the other shorter, covering only the top of the head, worn during court trials. The second type, used for regular court sessions, also has slight differences based on the judge's rank. This is because judges and lawyers are required not to appear ostentatious in court; the idea is that everyone looks similar, so the attire is solemn and dark-colored. The purpose of the wig is to make every court participant look the same, so that outside the court, no one can be recognized. Whether a judge or a senior counsel, when seated in court, they represent the law, and personal appearance is unimportant. Everyone is there to execute justice, and the seating arrangements in court also follow such rules.