>The resulting proposal was criticised at the time by advocates who said it was a “pained attempt” to comply while offering as little as possible. On Wednesday they criticised LegCo’s rejection of it.
>Advocacy group, Hong Kong [Marriage](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/marriage) Equality, said the veto sent “a troubling signal to both local and international communities – that court rulings may be disregarded and the dignity of individuals overlooked.
>[…]
>Amnesty International’s Nadia Rahman said the bill was “flawed”, and would have provided “the bare minimum of protection” only to couples who registered their relationship overseas, but its rejection showed “an alarming disdain for LGBTI rights”.
>During the lengthy debate some legislators said they were voting against the bill because it would affect the foundations of monogamous and heterosexual marriage in Hong Kong.
>Lawmaker Holden Chow from the city’s biggest pro-establishment party said the bill’s passage would mean opening “a Pandora’s box”, and “subverting Hong Kong’s marriage system between one man and one woman”.
>[…]
>Among the 14 who voted in favour of the bill, lawmaker Regina Ip likened it to a “minimum spending” requirement, given the rights offered were limited.
>Secretary for constitutional and mainland affairs Erick Tsang, said the government was disappointed that legislators vetoed the bill, but respected their decision which he said was on behalf of local residents and mainstream opinion.
>Meanwhile Beijing officials said the decision proved that LegCo was not a “rubber stamp” parliament, as critics have called it since the electoral overhaul.
>Polling has shown the majority of people in Hong Kong support same-sex relationships, and extensive lobbying by LGBTQ+ groups and a series of hard fought court cases have established some piecemeal rights, including those related to public housing, inheritance law [and spousal visas](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/04/uk-same-sex-couple-granted-spouse-visas-hong-kong).
>Nick Infinger, a Hongkonger who previously succeeded in an LGBTQ+ rights legal bid, said the community had few other places to turn.
>“Judicial review would be the only way that we can fight for our rights … little bit by little bit,” he said.
>The court of final appeal gave the government a two-year deadline, which ends this month. In a statement the government said it wouldn’t apply for an extension, but would “further discuss and study the issue with the department of justice”.
1 Comment
>The bill, which would have given limited rights to couples whose marriage or civil union was registered overseas, was in answer to a September 2023 ruling by the court of final appeal. The landmark case, [brought by activist Jimmy Sham](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/30/hong-kong-releases-second-group-democrats-jailed-four-years-national-security-trial), affirmed that the city’s laws defined marriage as between a man and a woman, but also said the government was obliged [to create an “alternative framework”](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/05/hong-kong-top-court-legal-recognition-same-sex-couples) which recognised the “core rights” of same-sex couples.
>The resulting proposal was criticised at the time by advocates who said it was a “pained attempt” to comply while offering as little as possible. On Wednesday they criticised LegCo’s rejection of it.
>Advocacy group, Hong Kong [Marriage](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/marriage) Equality, said the veto sent “a troubling signal to both local and international communities – that court rulings may be disregarded and the dignity of individuals overlooked.
>[…]
>Amnesty International’s Nadia Rahman said the bill was “flawed”, and would have provided “the bare minimum of protection” only to couples who registered their relationship overseas, but its rejection showed “an alarming disdain for LGBTI rights”.
>[…]
>Wednesday’s vote was the first time a bill has been rejected by LegCo since an [electoral overhaul](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/17/hong-kong-patriots-election-casts-doubt-over-democracy-as-city-enters-new-era) by the Chinese government, designed to ensure only pro-Beijing “patriots” could run Hong Kong, effectively removed opposition.
>During the lengthy debate some legislators said they were voting against the bill because it would affect the foundations of monogamous and heterosexual marriage in Hong Kong.
>Lawmaker Holden Chow from the city’s biggest pro-establishment party said the bill’s passage would mean opening “a Pandora’s box”, and “subverting Hong Kong’s marriage system between one man and one woman”.
>[…]
>Among the 14 who voted in favour of the bill, lawmaker Regina Ip likened it to a “minimum spending” requirement, given the rights offered were limited.
>Secretary for constitutional and mainland affairs Erick Tsang, said the government was disappointed that legislators vetoed the bill, but respected their decision which he said was on behalf of local residents and mainstream opinion.
>Meanwhile Beijing officials said the decision proved that LegCo was not a “rubber stamp” parliament, as critics have called it since the electoral overhaul.
>Polling has shown the majority of people in Hong Kong support same-sex relationships, and extensive lobbying by LGBTQ+ groups and a series of hard fought court cases have established some piecemeal rights, including those related to public housing, inheritance law [and spousal visas](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/04/uk-same-sex-couple-granted-spouse-visas-hong-kong).
>Nick Infinger, a Hongkonger who previously succeeded in an LGBTQ+ rights legal bid, said the community had few other places to turn.
>“Judicial review would be the only way that we can fight for our rights … little bit by little bit,” he said.
>The court of final appeal gave the government a two-year deadline, which ends this month. In a statement the government said it wouldn’t apply for an extension, but would “further discuss and study the issue with the department of justice”.
Further reading:
[Hong Kong’s courtroom dramas](https://www.economist.com/china/2025/08/21/hong-kongs-courtroom-dramas) – The Economist
[The obscure Jimmy Lai ruling that exposed the erosion of Hong Kong’s rule of law | China | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/22/jimmy-lai-ruling-hong-kong-erosion-rule-of-law)
!ping Democracy