HONG KONG - The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR)’s government is committed to upholding the rule of law, and the courts of the HKSAR shall exercise judicial power independently and free from any interference, the Department of Justice (DOJ) said on Wednesday.

Human rights and freedom in Hong Kong, including freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, are fully protected by the Basic Law. However, such freedoms are not absolute, the Department of Justice said

The department made the remarks in a statement in response to comments from local and overseas communities concerning the sentences of Joshua Wong Chi-fung and two others handed down by the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts earlier in the day.

READ MORE: HK separatist Joshua Wong jailed for 13.5 months

“Articles 63 and 85 of the Basic Law stipulate respectively that the DoJ ‘shall control criminal prosecutions, free from any interference’, and the courts of the HKSAR ‘shall exercise judicial power independently, free from any interference’,” the department said.

It said human rights and freedom in Hong Kong, including freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, are fully protected by the Basic Law. However, such freedoms are not absolute.

It quoted the Chief Justice of the Court of Final Appeal at the ceremonial opening of the Legal Year 2020 as saying that, "we see clear limits in the law to the exercise of rights. The enjoyment or insistence on one's rights does not, for example, provide any excuse to harm other people or their property, or to display acts of violence."

ALSO READ: No one is exempt from the law in Hong Kong

The department also said the three defendants had pleaded guilty to their charges. “Those who absurdly demanded for their immediate release not only disrespect our judicial system but also manifest their blatant denial of the fact that the defendants themselves pleaded guilty,” it said.

“It is unbecoming and irrational for people making sweeping attacks and baseless accusations against our judicial and legal systems without reference to the fact and circumstances of the case. Such statements, if made with a view to exert undue influence on our judicial and legal systems will be futile,” it added.