This happens most often in tax cases. The government doesn't like losing in court and then wants to make changes.
https://ifamagazine.com/article/gove...ssment-powers/
The public often doesn't mind because more tax = social justice apparently.
Another example that happened in my homeland is when Vodafone kept winning tax cases regarding the treatment of capital gains against the government. They won when the previous government was in power but this government kept fighting despite losses in every single court. They changed the law to tax them and then they lost in international arbitration. Very shameless.
They typically have to either go to the constitutional court for an interpretation and/or failing that, get a democratically elected legislature to change the law. Hardly the same. Or maybe let me know when/if Nat Sec will be debated upon in LegCo (though even then you could argue that it isn't very democratically elected).
HK is a second tier city in the GBA with few pretences left. Once you accept that... And may be you have but refuse to voice it, it makes perfect sense to ask the federal govt to interpret municipal laws and municipal court rulings... Just saying.
Institutions (esp overseas banks that are playing along) and people are carrying on pretending... They need to let these emotional anchors go one way or another.
Anyways I don't see the point of debating this ad nauseum. Folks who believe one way or another will not be convinced that there is another side to the coin.