Prior to the trial of former media magnate Jimmy Lai Chee-ying for the offense of colluding with foreign forces, the new British foreign secretary, David Cameron, met with Lai’s son, Sebastien Lai, in London. The UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office made strong statements expressing its opposition to the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL) and continued support for Jimmy Lai, which was the British government’s latest attempt to interfere in Hong Kong’s legal system and judicial independence.

Hong Kong respects the spirit of the rule of law, judicial independence, fairness and justice. Any attempt to undermine the rule of law in Hong Kong is destined to be futile.

Sebastien Lai has engaged in high-profile interviews with British media, relentlessly demanding the British government to “speak out” for his father. These maneuvers to exonerate Jimmy Lai distort the truth and openly trample upon the principles of the rule of law and justice.

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has previously suggested that Britain has the right to get involved in Hong Kong’s affairs by virtue of the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

The fact is, the Sino-British Joint Declaration has completed its historical mission. The 1984 Joint Declaration clearly delineated the rights and obligations of both China and the UK regarding China’s resumption of exercising sovereignty over Hong Kong and the transitional arrangements. The UK had no sovereignty, no governing power, and no supervisory power over Hong Kong after its return to China in 1997, and therefore, has no so-called “moral responsibility” toward Hong Kong. Some individuals in the UK have repeatedly attempted to confuse the concept of “moral responsibility” with interference in China’s internal affairs, which is unacceptable and impossible to accomplish.

Attempting to mislead the public, Sebastien Lai has relentlessly been publicizing Jimmy Lai’s conviction for fraud at the end of last year as an unfair judgment.

Sebastien Lai stated that Jimmy Lai became a British citizen as early as 1994, and he himself is also a British citizen, urging the UK government to pressure the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government to release Jimmy Lai. But are British citizens immune from legal consequences? The rule of law demands that before the law, everyone is equal, and anyone who breaks the law must face the appropriate legal sanctions. Jimmy Lai does not have any privilege that allows him to be above the law.

The Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance provides for the incorporation into the law of Hong Kong the provisions of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. Thus, fundamental human rights are protected without distinction for anyone, such as on the grounds of race or national origin.

Hong Kong is a society governed by the rule of law, as evidenced by its consistently high ranking in the WJP Rule of Law Index, which was higher than that of the United States in the 2023 index. The Basic Law and the NSL respect and safeguard human rights, and everyone is presumed innocent until proved guilty by the court. It is undeniable that Jimmy Lai has already enjoyed and exercised his right to defense and other litigation rights in accordance with local laws and international conventions. He has hired a team of top-notch lawyers, including senior counsels, to defend him, which demonstrates the rule of law and justice.

Allowing Jimmy Lai to undergo a fair and just trial in Hong Kong fully aligns with the spirit of the rule of law. External forces must stop interfering in Hong Kong affairs and refrain from meddling in China’s internal affairs. They should not continue down the wrong path, leading them further astray

The UK is a signatory to the United Nations Charter. Article 2(4) stipulates that “all members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against territorial integrity or political independence of any state”; this is the general principle and purpose of the UN Charter.

United Nations Resolution 2625, adopted by the General Assembly on Oct 24, 1970, is binding on the UK. It states that “no State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State”, and that “every State has an inalienable right to choose its political, economic, social and cultural systems, without interference by another State.”

Any country’s interference in Hong Kong’s legal system, judicial independence, court cases, and disturbance of China’s internal affairs are violations of international law and the basic norms of international relations. Anyone who interferes, deceives, or uses other means in the judicial process to obtain a judgment biased in their favor or for a third party, thereby preventing justice from being served, may be charged with perverting the course of justice and held criminally liable.

Sebastien Lai’s continuous pleas for external forces to intervene in Jimmy Lai’s case further proves that Jimmy Lai cannot shirk his responsibility for colluding with foreign or overseas forces to undermine national security. As pointed out by the spokesperson of the Chinese embassy in the UK, Jimmy Lai is the main plotter and instigator of some anti-China activities, blatantly colluding with external forces to undermine national security.

The Hong Kong SAR government’s prosecution of Jimmy Lai is entirely a just act. The British officials’ blatant intervention in Jimmy Lai’s case, which has entered the judicial process, attests to their support for the anti-China instigators, further exposing Jimmy Lai’s collusion with foreign forces. It also further proves that the HKSAR government’s prosecution of Jimmy Lai is entirely lawful, reasonable and legitimate.

Allowing Jimmy Lai to undergo a fair and just trial in Hong Kong fully aligns with the spirit of the rule of law. External forces must stop interfering in Hong Kong affairs and refrain from meddling in China’s internal affairs. They should not continue down the wrong path, leading them further astray.

The author is a law professor, director of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies, and vice-president of the Hong Kong Basic Law Education Association.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.