{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02685765443151298, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008952551477170993, 'mean_word_length': 4.427184466019417, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The First Decade of The Basic Law—A Judicial Perspective

With total commitment to the rule of law, the founding judiciary of post-handover Hong Kong took its oath of office before the sun rose on 1 July 1997. We felt a sense not of occasion but of purpose. Thus did we embark upon our duties at the dawn of the Basic Law and its concept of "one country, two systems". Reviewing the first decade of the Basic Law, no judge can give the judicial perspective. Offering a judicial perspective, I begin by paying tribute to my colleagues at every level, to the profession and to the academy. As I shall explain, it has been-and must remain-a joint effort. The common law methods handed down to us were shaped under the pressures of real life, often in the most testing of times. Such methods are naturally adaptable to change-even momentous change-while remaining true to principle. This was good preparation for realising the full potential of 'one country, two systems'. So was our system's experience in accommodating diversity. Upon entering into occupation of Hong Kong in 1841' Britain proclaimed 2 that pending Her