National security education requires a sustained effort beyond an annual campaign and should become a natural part of daily life, Hong Kong Secretary for Justice Paul Lam Ting-kwok said as the city prepares to commemorate the 10th National Security Education Day on April 15.

This milestone year also marks five years since the implementation of the National Security Law for Hong Kong in June 2020, and one year since local national security legislation was enacted under Article 23 of the Basic Law in March 2024.

Under the theme “Advancing Towards More In-Depth and Effective Implementation”, various government departments have rolled out engagement programs to deepen public awareness of national security.

At a recent closed-door media interview that included China Daily, Lam detailed his personal involvement, including a student national security competition awards ceremony on April 15. In the coming week, he will join students for related events at a primary school, attend a symposium on national security and patriotic education at the Education University of Hong Kong, and participate in the Immigration Department’s open house.

The Department of Justice will host a forum in late June to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the National Security Law for Hong Kong, facilitating in-depth discussions on its implementation.

However, during the interview, Lam underscored that national security education extends beyond these calendar events and legislative anniversaries.

“We celebrate Valentine’s Day on Feb 14, but it doesn’t mean you only do something nice to your spouse on that particular day — it is supposed to be something you do on a daily basis,” he said.

Multipronged approach

Lam outlined his department’s “three-dimensional” efforts for safeguarding national security.

“First and foremost is education — with a particular focus on enhancing public understanding of Hong Kong’s constitutional order and national security obligations,” Lam said. “However, awareness alone is insufficient without a sense of belonging and shared interest.”

He emphasized that true compliance stems from internalized values rather than external enforcement. “We must help residents comprehend why upholding our legal order matters — how it directly impacts their personal well-being, their social circles, and broader stability."

ALSO READ: HK educators’ role in national security education stressed

“When residents recognize these connections, they naturally apply these principles in daily life.”

The department has incorporated national security education into routine programs, including launching a public online portal compiling related court judgments, and a training program to promote national security principles and its practical judicial implementation.

On the legislative front, Lam said the department plays a central role in continuously refining Hong Kong’s national security legal framework.

“We work closely with the Security Bureau and other policy departments to ensure the legislation contains appropriate national security provisions and provide specialized support to mature the legal safeguards,” Lam said.

The department is routinely reviewing and updating legal tools to address emerging risks, including considering law amendments to ensure that the legal framework remains robust and adaptable.

The third pillar involves support for law enforcement. “When enforcement agencies identify potential violations of national security laws, our department provides comprehensive legal assistance throughout judicial proceedings,” he said.

“This includes supporting prosecution efforts by the police and other enforcement bodies to ensure the effective implementation of national security legislation.”

Sanctions will fail

Addressing Western criticism, including US sanctions imposed on him and 16 other Hong Kong officials over the past five years, Lam characterized such actions as politically motivated and driven by geopolitical tensions.

Hong Kong is fulfilling its constitutional duty through the national security laws, which align with legal principles and international standards, he said.

“Our response must remain rational. Instead of reacting emotionally, Hong Kong should fact-check accusations, address them with clear reasoning, and demonstrate its commitment to the rule of law.”

Lam commented on the ineffectiveness of sanctions, which have also targeted Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu and four incumbent department secretaries and bureau directors, as well as mainland officials.

“Our response is straightforward and factual: Has any sanctioned official actually left their post? Can anyone name a single person who can no longer dine out, go shopping, or watch movies? … These objective facts speak for themselves,” he said.

“The sanctions have failed to disrupt our work efficiency, weaken our resolve, or impact our daily lives in any meaningful way.”

Lam countered that the US itself demonstrates “transnational repression” — the very term Washington has used to criticize Hong Kong for lawfully safeguarding national security.

For example, Lam said, Hong Kong has never engaged in actions like abduction or extraterritorial activities that violate international law. Instead, it has used law-based measures, such as revoking the passports of fugitives, he said.

The justice secretary also cited Hong Kong’s robust Judiciary — two Australian judges recently joining the city’s Court of Final Appeal — to counter Western narratives about declining international confidence in Hong Kong’s legal system.

READ MORE: HK chief vows to boost national security education, economy

In 1997, there were only five overseas nonpermanent judges sitting on Hong Kong’s top court, and the number gradually grew to 15 by 2020. Yet its recent reduction to six such members — including five departures last year alone — has drawn some speculation.

Lam urged an objective analysis of those departures, saying they “arise from diverse circumstances — from judges having simply completed their fixed terms to senior retirees declining reappointment for personal considerations”.

He described these transitions as reflecting normal judicial turnover rather than any deficiency in Hong Kong’s legal system.