Regarding the law stating that judges still have the right to grant bail, Tan Yiu-chung said that if the law is too written, it may not be suitable, “If he (the defendant) can no longer take care of himself if he goes to one place, what will you do to trap him in (prison)? It’s all “spreading out” and it is allowed to come out (because) it proves that there will be no more trouble.”
Representative Chen Manqi of the Minato District People’s Congress stated on Facebook that if the final court needs to deal with legal interpretation disputes involving Article 42 of the Minato National Security Law, it goes beyond the scope of applicability of the law. “The interpretation referred to in Article 65 of the Minato National Security Law belongs to the whole country. The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress is what everyone expects! This is the correct constitutional order and procedure!” She responded to this newspaper’s query, saying that when the two parties to the litigation dispute the 42 legal standards, the judge needs to consider the original spirit of the legislation, or the court needs to consider 42 Under circumstances such as the legal relationship between the article and other clauses, it is necessary to seek an explanation from the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress. Chen Manqi believes that the power of interpretation of the National People’s Congress is not passive. Because the National Security Law is a national law, the National People’s Congress can actively exercise its power of interpretation.
Article 42 of the “Minato National Security Law” states that unless the judge has sufficient reasons to believe that the defendant will not continue to commit acts endangering national security, bail shall not be granted.
–
