Abstract
A recent judgment of the Privy Council on a relatively minor incitement charge in Trinidad and Tobago surprisingly impacts a decisive seditious trial in Hong Kong — both places were former colonies of the British Crown and have adopted common law. While common law is a colonial heritage in both places, it also proves to be capable of providing some protection to dissident subjects in their postcolonial times, particularly in Hong Kong, where the National Security Law recently enacted by the PRC now reigns supreme. The international history of common law was largely a sprawling attempt of the British Crown to maintain its power in an ever‐expanding empire. But during the process, common law also gained a powerful life. This article also discusses the theorization of intention by GEM Anscombe to demonstrate how the idea of intention reveals the interrogative nature of common law, which constantly looks back at the past to provide guidance to navigate the present. This visit of Anscombe's ideas also helps us investigate the assumption of the right‐bearing individuals in Western jurisdiction. Examining some of the postcolonial discussions that sprang from the Caribbean conditions and the current predicaments of Hong Kong, this article provides a unique angle to understand common law as both a governing tool of British colonialism and a valuable means to interrogate power. This analysis also offers a decolonial politics that acknowledges critically the colonial attachment found in many postcolonial communities, as well as the need to collectivize the legal subject.