Your questions have been answered long beforehand, why do I have to keep repeating my points to you??? It doesn't matter that whether non-HK judges will judge it to the desire of pro-government's will, they shouldn't exist in the first place.
As I mentioned, they're only in Hong Kong at the express permission of the HK government. The HK government wants them there. The pro-HK government South China Morning Post wants them there too.
The same thing that prevents foreigners to be judges in america or other western countries
I can't speak for every country, but in the UK you don't have to be British to be a judge. You can also be Irish or from any member of the Commonwealth. You can also be a dual national (e.g. hold a PRC passport). The Irish/Commonwealth link to the UK is much like the ability for non HK-residents to be judges in HK.
But as I said, non-HKers can only be judges in HK with the express permission of the Chief Executive - and I wonder if you really think she'd appoint foreign judges if Beijing didn't want it.
so my example of the foreign journo that walks free wasn't judged by a judge that can be handpicked by the CE
I'm still waiting for the journalist's name. As I said, the foreign judges tend to be in the appeal courts. It's possible that the case you're thinking of was decided by a Caucasian person that lived in HK from birth and therefore has the same right to be a judge as any other HKer. You're not going to suggest jobs in Hong Kong be restricted by race, are you?
Then again maybe you are.
When national matters come, following the one country two systems, hong kong *must* listen.
So what's the purpose of having a court case for national security matters? Why not just dispense with the trial and have the government directly hand down the conviction and punishment?
The case being brought up as an extradition case in the first place is already a long arm jurisdiction from america and canada pathetically was following it
Canada has an extradition treaty with the US. Why would the Canadian government decide not to begin extradition proceedings if it thought the requisite requirements of the treaty were fulfilled?
If you want to make me acknowledge even a sliver of that for canada's judicial system, then canada shouldn't held ms. Meng for 2 years already in the first place
Much of that has been due to her own legal team seeking more time to build their case. If they'd said they were ready to go and wanted an expedited hearing they probably could have had it - until Covid-19 threw a spanner in the works and slowed things down, of course.
Now that you got my answer, when will you admit that the american government is a hypocrite, following my reasoning?
How is the US government a hypocrite for wanting to extradite a Chinese citizen in Canada via its extradition treaty? If you're referring to US criticism of China breaking the Basic Law by giving itself the right to extradite HKers to China, well you've acknowledged that you don't believe in judicial independence for anything involving national security. So I think the US' criticism would be quite valid.
This is my last reply to you as well
Why, were you running out of energy dodging my questions? Try having a cup of coffee, it might perk you up.
