As defined in Articles 19 and 85 of the Hong Kong Basic Law, the Court of Final Appeal "exercises judicial power in the Region independently and free from any interference."

However, this power is not absolute; the court's decisions can be overturned by the Chinese government via a controversial process known as an "interpretation" via Article 158 of the Basic Law.

[14][15][16][17][18] The Cheung Court was the first CFA bench to hear substantive final appeals arising from the 2020 National Security Law.

The Cheung Court have issued landmark decisions on Hong Kong courts' competency to review acts of the national legislature, LGBT rights, the Bill of Rights, national security, the freedom of expression and assembly, the freedom of the press, and commercial law.

Traditionally, all overseas non-permanent judges came from three common law jurisdictions: the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand.

Although this arrangement has attracted criticism of "undermining judicial independence", an interpretation by the NPCSC does not affect any court judgments already rendered.

"[42] The Central Government of China's power to interpret—in essence overturn—the CFA's rulings has led the CFA to be nicknamed the "Court of Semi-Final Appeal" by people such as former Hong Kong Bar Association chairman Martin Lee KC SC, veteran activist-investor David Webb, human rights lawyer Mark Daly, as well as the general public.

[43][44][45][46] The term "Court of Semi-Final Appeal" was first officially referenced to by then-Secretary for Justice Elsie Leung as far back as 1999.

"[49] Below is a list of Article 158 interpretations to date: In 2012, Permanent Judge Kemal Bokhary—known as a leading liberal and dissenting voice on the Court—did not have his tenure extended past the mandated retirement age of 65.

[51] Overseas non-permanent judges have so far not taken part in full hearings of national security cases brought before the CFA.

No non-permanent judge from overseas jurisdictions had ever quit the Court mid-term before the enactment of the National Security Law.

[52] In March 2022, both Lord Reed and Lord Hodge resigned as non-permanent judges, citing the National Security Law leading to the judges being unable to "continue to sit in Hong Kong without appearing to endorse an administration which has departed from values of political freedom, and freedom of expression, to which the Justices of the Supreme Court are deeply committed", whilst emphasising at the same time that "[t]he courts in Hong Kong continue to be internationally respected for their commitment to the rule of law".

Former UK Supreme Court President Lord Neuberger (who first joined on 1 March 2009) renewed his appointment in February 2024, maintaining that he still believed Hong Kong’s judiciary was independent, and its legal profession “thriving and able”.

[18][63] On 28 November 2022, the CFA – composed of Chief Justice Andrew Cheung, and permanent judges Robert Ribeiro and Joseph Fok – granted ad hoc admission to Tim Owen KC to defend Jimmy Lai at his trial on charges contrary to the National Security Law, and rejected the Hong Kong Justice Secretary's leave application to appeal the ruling of the lower courts on this.

[65][66] Ultimately, Owen was replaced by Marc Corlett KC, a New Zealand King's Counsel but who had gained admission to the Hong Kong bar in 2020.

Corlett was widely seen as a "like-for-like" replacement for Owen, and showed that overseas specialist lawyers would need to be admitted full-time to the Hong Kong bar before being allowed to participate in national security trials.

"[68] This suggestion was rejected by both the Hong Kong Bar Association and the judiciary, stressing that, "...there is no basis at all to call into question the integrity and independence of Hong Kong judges, whose selection, appointment and discharge of their constitutional role and duties are, and must remain, free from any political considerations and interference.

"[69][70] Lord Sumption criticised the proposal to sanction Hong Kong judges as "an idea that is crude, counterproductive and unjust", adding that "[m]ost of them are honourable people with all the liberal instincts of the common law".

The legislators, who by protocol accept the recommendations of the commission, claimed that she might be influenced by her husband, former Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma, whose defence of Hong Kong's judicial independence they considered unpatriotic.