National security must be seen beyond HK perspective

Debate over the national security legislation for Hong Kong heated up before details of the draft law became known. Now that the law has been passed and has taken effect, some are still arguing against it.

Their arguments have one thing in common: They are all made from the perspective of Hong Kong without consideration for the nation.

It is not surprising that the detractors would find fault with it. But the legislative intent of the law is to safeguard national security, which is essentially a matter of the State.

The implementation of the new law could be hindered if some continue to view the national security issue only from the perspective of Hong Kong. We must view it from multiple perspectives.

First of all, we must look at the big picture. It refers to the global political landscape. Hong Kong’s loophole in national security is being exploited by some foreign governments and politicians to contain China’s development.

Therefore, specific provisions of the law must be sufficiently strong to deter acts endangering national security and nip separatism in the bud.

In addition to the penalties, emphasis must be placed on implementation and enforcement, particularly the role of judges. Accordingly, the chief executive is empowered to designate a group of judges who are qualified to handle cases related to national security.

Apart from the big picture, we must view the national security issue from the perspective of the State. Since the law emphasizes the role of the central authorities in safeguarding national security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, some detractors claim Beijing is undermining Hong Kong’s autonomy, or compromising “one country, two systems”.

Such arguments reveal a misunderstanding of the political framework. The basic principle of this framework is: “One country” precedes “two systems.” On issues of national security, exercising State power is of paramount importance.

Issues relating to national security are not supposed to be handled by local governments. If there is an independent movement emerging in Hong Kong, this cannot be handled by Hong Kong itself.

Take the Catalan independence movement in Spain, for instance. It was the central government that took it upon itself to tackle this national crisis. Spain’s Senate endorsed then Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy’s proposal to remove Catalonia’s autonomy by invoking Article 155 of the Constitution.

The crisis was resolved after the Catalan government was dissolved and the central government took over the governance of Catalonia. Political leaders involved in the independence movement were tried by the Supreme Court of Spain in Madrid, the country’s capital.

If we view national security issues from this perspective, it is easy to understand why the central government will set up a national security agency in Hong Kong that is tasked with supervising, guiding, facilitating and supporting the HKSAR government to fulfill its responsibility of safeguarding national security.

The agency, together with other relevant State organs, will also exercise jurisdiction over a small number of criminal cases involving acts that threaten national security.

Some concerns held that promulgation of the law would worsen the environment for business and investment activities, and even for residents’ lives.

Such concerns are understandable, since the law is a new thing for Hong Kong people. However, it can be expected that people will feel reassured when they have a thorough understanding of the law’s jurisdiction, scope of application and legal procedures.

The practice in Singapore provides Hong Kong with a glimpse of the future. The country’s strong security law has not dragged down its economy or hindered social development, because Singaporeans as well as members of the international community who have a sufficient knowledge of the law’s provisions have embraced the law without any difficulty.

Hong Kong today can best be depicted in the words of Zengzi, a student of Chinese philosopher Confucius: “A wise man, shouldering the heavy burden of duty, must show resilience and resolution during the long journey of fulfilling it.”

Vice-Premier Liu He’s recent remarks at the Lujiazui Forum 2020, a financial summit, in Shanghai envisioned Hong Kong’s future. Liu said Beijing was expecting Hong Kong to demonstrate its strength as an international financial center, and that concrete actions would be taken to protect the rights and interests of all investors for the sustainable prosperity of the city.

For now, Hong Kong is facing sanctions by United States-led Western countries. To overcome such threats, we must forgo the narrow-minded Hong Kong-centered perspective and adopt the national perspective.

Before Beijing assigns any significant roles to the city, Hong Kong must be well-prepared to resist the infiltrations and interference of foreign powers.

The author is senior research officer of the One Country Two Systems Research Institute, a think tank. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

The practice in Singapore provides Hong Kong with a glimpse of the future. The country’s strong security law has not dragged down its economy or hindered social development, because Singaporeans as well as members of the international community who have a sufficient knowledge of the law’s provisions have embraced the law without any difficulty.