National security addition to Basic Law fortifies bedrock for Hong Kong’s stability

That a number of high-profile advocates of the violent unrest in Hong Kong — who were so exuberant after US lawmakers customized bills in support of their activities — have collectively dissolved their organizations, quit their jobs, or fled the city over the past few days, claiming the national security legislation to be introduced by the special administrative region on Wednesday targets them, only reinforces the necessity of the legislation.

In doing so, they have effectively passed judgment on their own actions, since the legislation, which criminalizes secession, sedition, subversion, terrorism and working with foreign actors in Hong Kong to undermine national security, puts only those engaging in such naturally criminalized activities in its crosshairs.

The legislation, which was unanimously passed by the 162 members of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee, including the Hong Kong delegates, within 15 minutes of the meeting starting on Tuesday, will better enable the SAR authorities to fulfill their obligation to safeguard the city’s security and stability as it has been added to Annex III of the Basic Law of Hong Kong, closing the loopholes that have been exploited by the destabilizing elements in Hong Kong and their hostile-to-China foreign patrons.

There are thoughtful arrangements to ensure its effective enforcement, including the setting up of new bodies responsible for national security in the SAR. And the articles of the law show that the nation’s lawmakers have heeded the lessons from the turmoil that has plagued Hong Kong for more than a year and which has exposed the limitations of the SAR’s judicial, executive and legislative organs in defending the city’s rule of law because of the region’s lack of national security legislation.

Hong Kong has paid a heavy price for this, as the unrest has cost some people their lives, and others their livelihoods.

And despite claims to the contrary, the involvement of the central authorities in maintaining stability and security in Hong Kong will better uphold the SAR’s high degree of autonomy as it will stop external forces from meddling in the SAR, allowing Hong Kong people to firmly grasp the initiative in their own hands.

Before details of the law were known, radical elements in Hong Kong and fork-tongued Western politicians speculated about the content so as to paint it in a bad light. But having been promulgated by the SAR government, questions about the law, especially those related to implementation and enforcement, are being answered, and the malicious motivation behind the speculation is evident.

Whatever might be claimed otherwise, there are no grounds for questioning the validity of the law or any debate about its content or necessity.

Acts that seriously challenge the “one country, two systems” principle, gravely undermine Hong Kong’s rule of law and development interests, or which threaten national security will not be tolerated in Hong Kong. The law makes that clear.