Conflict In Interpretation Of Hong Kong's Basic Law And Its Settlement

After the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region,"one country,two systems"realized the leap from the theoretical concept to the social practice,and became the political reality of Hong Kong.All this is based on the fundamental law of Hong Kong's Basic Law.Since 1997,Hong Kong has returned to the motherland for 22 years,and these 22 years have also been the implementation of the Basic Law of Hong Kong in implementing the"one country,two systems"policy for 22 years."Saints good is inadequate governance,law are not enough to make their own." With the firm support of the central authorities,the Hong Kong SAR government unites all sectors of the community,gathers consensus and is fully committed to the implementation of the Basic Law of Hong Kong.Although there have been some protests and demonstrations on the streets of Hong Kong,on the whole,the policy of "one country,two systems" is correct and the implementation of the Basic Law in Hong Kong has been successful.At the same time,we must also pay attention to the obstacles and challenges encountered in the implementation and enforcement of the Basic Law of Hong Kong.In the process of the implementation and application of the law,there is inevitably ambiguity or inconsistent understanding of certain norms,which requires the authoritative organs to interpret the legal provisions of those disputes in accordance with the law and unify the understanding and understanding of all parties.Due to the special status and content of the Basic Law in Hong Kong,coupled with the relatively large differences in constitutional culture and legal system between the mainland and Hong Kong,some constitutional and legal issues have arisen in understanding and interpreting certain provisions of the Basic Law of Hong Kong.Cases involving the relevant provisions of the Hong Kong Basic Law,such as the"Right of Abode"Case,and"The Democratic Republic of Congo"Case,which have been tried by the Hong Kong SAR courts,have caused considerable controversy and concern in Hong Kong and the Mainland.In terms of understanding some terms,the two are very different.The occurrence of these cases shows that the understanding and interpretation of certain provisions of the Basic Law of Hong Kong by members of the judiciary in the SAR are not consistent with the understanding and interpretation of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress.The life of the law lies in its implementation,and the correct understanding and interpretation of the Basic Law of Hong Kong is a prerequisite for ensuring that the social practice of"one country,two systems"is not shape or changed.It is also a prerequisite for ensuring the continued prosperity and stability of the Hong Kong SAR community.From the point of view of the design of the interpretation mechanism of the Basic Law in Hong Kong,the powers of interpretation of the Basic Law are vested in the the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress,taking into account the historical realities of the Hong Kong SAR and the traditional English common law tradition,which may be granted to the Hong Kong SAR courts to interpret the relevant provisions relating to the Basic Law of Hong Kong in their proceedings.It also restricts the power of the Hong Kong SAR courts to interpret the"outside the scope of autonomy"clause of the Basic Law of Hong Kong.Judging from the judicial practice of the Basic Law of Hong Kong over the past 22 years,due to the relatively large differences in constitutional culture,legal system and judicial tradition between the mainland and Hong Kong,the constitutional status of the Hong Kong Basic Law,such as that of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress,has been questioned and challenged by the Hong Kong SAR.and the interpretation of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress has not been well implemented in the Hong Kong SAR,and these problems have revealed some flaws in the interpretation mechanism of the Basic Law of Hong Kong.In view of this,this paper hopes to examine the advantages and challenges of the interpretation system of the Basic Law of Hong Kong through the understanding and interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Basic Law of Hong Kong in the"right of Abode"series case and the"The Democratic Republic of Congo"case by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress and the Hong Kong SAR courts.To explore the connection and coordination between the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress and Hong Kong SAR Court of Justice in both interpretations.