Hong Kong—The Law Society of Hong Kong has clarified that its decision to disallow Kevin Yam, an Australia-based lawyer and prominent activist, from practicing law in the city was not influenced by his political views. Instead, the society emphasized that the ruling stemmed from professional misconduct findings made by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.
On Monday, the Law Society defended its stance following the tribunal’s determination that Yam’s actions constituted “grave and serious” misconduct. Charges against him arose after he called on the United States to impose sanctions on judges and prosecutors involved in politically sensitive cases during a congressional hearing in May 2023.
In July, the tribunal ruled that Yam should be removed from the Roll of Solicitors and ordered him to cover costs of HK$816,600 related to the disciplinary hearing. His disbarment was publicly acknowledged on August 22, as he opted not to appeal the decision.
In its statement, the Law Society reaffirmed that solicitors have a duty to uphold high standards and the rule of law, stressing that the disciplinary process is vital for maintaining public confidence in the legal profession and the justice system. “It is important to clarify that the Tribunal’s findings were based solely on professional conduct and not on any alleged criminal offense or political opinion,” the Law Society stated.
The tribunal’s actions followed a total of 228 complaints lodged against Yam’s conduct, including a notable complaint from Secretary for Justice Paul Lam.
Yam has gained notoriety as a vocal advocate for democracy in Hong Kong and is currently among 34 overseas activists subject to arrest warrants under the national security law. Authorities in Hong Kong have placed a HK$1 million bounty for information leading to his capture, alleging that he has colluded with foreign entities to undermine national security.
Yam’s controversial request for sanctions was made during testimony before the U.S. Congress’s Congressional-Executive Commission on China, a bipartisan group focused on monitoring human rights issues in China.
Since the introduction of national security legislation in June 2020, implemented directly into Hong Kong’s mini-constitution, authorities have expanded their powers significantly. This law criminalizes a range of actions including subversion and collusion with foreign forces, which critics argue has led to a decline in freedoms and seen many civil society groups disbanded.
While the government asserts that the legislation has restored stability to Hong Kong, skepticism remains among international observers and human rights advocates, who criticize the resulting crackdown on dissent and civil liberties.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by emailing contact@publiclawlibrary.org.