Since the recent jailing of a number of radical social activists and former student leaders for their lawbreaking behavior during protests conducted over the past few years, there have been allegations at home - from the opposition camp - and abroad - from Western media such as The New York Times and members of a United States congressional panel - that these cases were "political prosecution". But this time, fingers are pointed, quite ironically, at an unusual suspect - the court.

What is ironic is that the opposition camp and some foreign media used to have high words for Hong Kong's judicial system and consider it a cornerstone of the rule of law in the city. But when the higher courts corrected lower ones' error of over-leniency in previous sentencing, the judiciary is suddenly viewed as hand in glove with the administration in orchestrating what they claim to be political persecution. What it takes for the courts to transform from defenders of the rule of law into saboteurs is just a few rulings not to the opposition's liking.

Like all other trials and hearings in Hong Kong, those court cases in question were conducted in an independent and open manner, and the verdict and sentences were handed down with full and highly professional reasoning as to why and how the judges had arrived at the judgments, citing relevant laws and precedents. If the defendants do not agree with the judges, they could appeal to a higher court.

Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor and the Department of Justice rightly reiterated on Monday that the court made the rulings solely from a legal perspective. Any suggestion of "political prosecution" is biased at best. The defendants were punished for violating the law not because of their political beliefs. In fact, if the courts are really conspiring with the administration to throw as many opposition figures into jail as possible, one wonders how the opposition would account for the controversial court ruling that acquitted former lawmaker Leung Kwok-hung despite his failure to report to Legislative Council the donation by media tycoon Jimmy Lai Chee-ying. And how about what many viewed as overly harsh sentences on the seven police officers accused of using excessive force during the arrest of a protester, later convicted of assaulting police himself? How does the conspiracy theory fit into these cases? Double standards have apparently been applied when the opposition only oppose to those rulings that are not in their favor.

What jeopardizes the rule of law most is the weakening of public confidence in our judicial system, Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li pointed out in his speech in the 2017 Legal Year opening ceremony. In smearing the Hong Kong law courts which have in these cases faithfully executed their duties and powers vested in them by law, the opposition and their foreign cohorts are doing exactly what the chief justice has warned against.

(HK Edition 08/22/2017 page8)