The Chief Justice of Hong Kong, Geoffrey Ma Tao-li, has stressed that the courts of Hong Kong has autonomy, which is guaranteed within Hong Kong's mini-constitution, also known as Basic Law, South China Morning Post reported.

Any criticism of a ruling within a court of Hong Kong should start from how Basic Law is also a reflection of the policy that the People's Republic of China has implemented in the city.

Ma said:

"So when I hear commentaries about... the outcomes of cases before the court or about our legal system... I turn to basics, and those are largely contained in the Basic Law. All these would be obvious to any law student, and certainly to any lawyer."

Remarks made after China said Hong Kong courts have no power to rule on ban

Ma's remarks were made on Nov. 24, in the wake of an earlier statement on Nov. 19 by China’s top legislative body, which said that Hong Kong courts have no power to rule on the constitutionality of a face mask ban.

However, Ma did not directly reference it.

Previously, Yan Tanwei, a spokesman for the Legislative Affairs Commission of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC), said that "no authority has the right to make judgements and decisions".

Yan said: "Whether the laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region comply with the Basic Law of Hong Kong can only be judged and decided by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress."

Yan's statement had been delivered a day after the Hong Kong High Court ruled that the controversial face mask ban was unconstitutional.

Chief Justice emphasises that Hong Kong has been served well by its law

Ma also emphasised that Hong Kong had been served well by its law so far, and that its judiciary was internationally recognised, SCMP further highlighted.

He said: "I can say from my own experience that Hong Kong is regarded as very much a part of the common law world and enjoys considerable support and admiration from our counterparts in many jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and New Zealand."

Additionally, Ma highlighted that the legal system of Hong Kong contained the principles of:

• equality before the law,
• determination of disputes strictly in accordance with the law,
• presumption of innocence,
• guarantee of a fair trial; and, most importantly,
• the independence of the judiciary.

Such principles, he further stated, are also guaranteed and spelled out within Hong Kong's Basic Law.

How much control does Hong Kong's courts actually have?

According to the BBC, under Basic Law, Hong Kong's courts are responsible "within the limits of its autonomy" to determine the legality of the government's actions.

However, the power of interpretation of the Basic Law is vested in the NPCSC.

Wile Hong Kong courts may interpret other provisions of the Basic Law, the court must follow relevant NPCSC interpretations.

Thus far, the NPCSC has acted a total of five times in interpreting Basic Law, with the most recent incident being in 2016 when two Hong Kong lawmakers refused to say the oath properly.

This resulted in the NPCSC ruling that officials must "accurately, completely and solemnly" read out their oaths swearing allegiance to China, otherwise they must bear legal consequences.

The move was criticised for essentially changing the law, rather than explaining how the law should be implemented.

Left photo from Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Website, right photo by Oliver Haynes/ SOPA Images/ LightRocket via Getty Images