Public Law and Human Rights Book Review Seminar Series (III) The Concept of Proportionality in Public Law
On 17 May 2022, the Public Law and Human Rights Forum (CPLR) and Asia Pacific Law Review (APLR) hosted the third seminar in the Public Law and Human Rights Book Review Series to discuss the book “The Concept of Proportionality in Public Law”, published by City University of Hong Kong Press in 2020: https://www.cityu.edu.hk/upress/the-concept-of-proportionality-in-public-law
The webinar was moderated by Dr Daniel PASCOE (Associate Professor, School of Law, City University of Hong Kong; CPLR Core Member). He welcomed all participants and introduced the book’s author, Dr Wai Man Franco CHUNG (PCLL Student, University of Hong Kong; PhD Graduate, City University of Hong Kong; Public Law Researcher) and the reviewer Dr Pui Yin LO (Professor, Barrister-at-law (England & Wales and Hong Kong); Centre for Chinese Law, Faculty of Law, The University of Hong Kong).
Dr Chung provided an overview of his book which examined the proportionality principle from various aspects: the extent to which the concept has been integrated into English and HK law, the difficulties the English and HK Courts have encountered, the possibility of the concept being fully adopted as a free-standing ground of judicial review, and how its implementation has affected cases concerning socio-economic rights as enshrined in ICESCR.
Dr Chung argued that the ongoing attempt to integrate proportionality analysis within EU Law and international human rights law by the CJEU & ECHR offer the English and HK Courts opportunities to re-assess their own approaches. The rationale of proportionality analysis is that if individual rights are to be taken seriously, the state may only impose restrictions that are justified by a legitimate purpose and that are strictly necessary. Dr Chung emphasised that the court plays an important role in requiring the executive branch to exercise its power fairly, reasonably and consistently. His book explores how the proportionality principle can offer a more structured and intensive approach in scrutinising administrative decisions, aiming to increase the awareness of administrative decision makers of legally binding obligations to work within the scope of their powers.
Dr Lo explained that the relevant constitutional arrangements may also contribute to safeguarding proportionality analysis, for example through the separation of powers, which allows the court to examine the validity of actions by the other branches of government. He then argued that the concept of proportionality in EU law and international human rights law might need to be interpreted differently to fit different jurisdictions’ local circumstances and their existing practices. Dr Chung responded by stating that, if a jurisdiction has decided to enter into an international treaty, it is bound by the unified human rights standards found within that treaty and voluntarily acceded to. Local circumstances do not operate as an excuse to not follow the jurisprudence of the CJEU or ECHR. Dr Pascoe spoke about one key dilemma that Hong Kong judges face: they might not be able to protect the interests of the PRC while at the same time safeguarding human rights. Dr Lo responded in saying that HK judges swear a public oath to uphold the Basic Law, pledge allegiance to the HKSAR and to apply the relevant laws, which include the PRC national laws listed in Basic Law Annex III. Though the National Security Law and the pre-existing laws are not necessarily contradictory, judges have to decide on a case by case basis what the best practice is.
二零二二年五月十七日，公法與人權論壇（CPLR）和亞太法律評論（APLR）舉辦了公法與人權書評系列第三場研討會，討論2020 年由香港城市大學出版社出版的《公法中的比例原則》一書: https://www.cityu.edu.hk/upress/the-concept-of-proportionality-in-public-law
網絡研討會由 Daniel PASCOE 博士（香港城市大學法學院副教授；CPLR 核心成員）主持。他歡迎所有參與者，並介紹了本書的作者Wai Man Franco CHUNG博士（香港大學法學專業證書學生；香港城市大學博士研究生；公法研究員）和評論人Pui Yin LO博士（教授，大律師（英格蘭和威爾士和香港）；香港大學法律學院中國法律研究中心）。
Franco CHUNG博士概述了他的書從多個方面審視了比例原則：此概念在多大程度上融入英國和香港法律，英國和香港法院在融入過程中遇到何種困難，概念作為司法審查的獨立依據被完全採用的可能性，以及其融入過程如何影響被《經濟、社會、文化權利國際公約》所規範的社會經濟權利案件。
Franco CHUNG博士認為，歐洲聯盟法院和歐洲人權公約正嘗試將比例原則分析納入歐盟法律和國際人權法，這亦能為英國和香港法院提供了重新評估自己審理方法的機會。比例原則的基本原理是，若尊重大眾的個人權利，國家只應施加有正當目的且絕對必要的限制。鐘博士強調，法庭在要求行政部門公平、合理和一致地行使權力方面發揮著重要作用。此書亦探討了比例原則如何有助提供一個更有條理和更深入的方法去審查行政決策，希望能增加行政決策者其權力範圍及相關法律約束的認識。
Pui Yin LO博士認為相關憲制安排也可能有助於保障相稱性分析，例如通過權力分立，法院能夠審查其他政府部門的行動的有效性。他指出歐盟法律和國際人權法中的比例概念可能需要作不同的解釋，以融入不同司法管轄區的當地情況及其現有做法。Franco CHUNG博士回應說，如果一個司法管轄區決定加入一項國際條約，它就會受到它自願加入的該條約中的人權標準約束。當地情況難以融入不能作為不遵循 歐洲聯盟法院和歐洲人權公約判例的藉口。Daniel PASCOE 博士談到了香港法官面臨的一個關鍵困境：他們可能無法在保護中華人民共和國利益的同時保障人權。羅博士回應說，香港法官公開宣誓擁護《基本法》，效忠香港特別行政區，並採用相關法律，包括《基本法》附件三所列的中華人民共和國全國性法律。儘管《香港國家安全法》和現有法律不一定相互矛盾，但法官必需根據具體情況決定最佳做法是什麼。