Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu pledged in his Policy Address to complete the legislation according to Article 23 of the Basic Law by next year. This was the first time that a clear timetable was set for the Article 23 legislation since the implementation of the Basic Law 26 years ago.

Completion of the legislation process would be a major milestone of great significance in the implementation of “one country, two systems” in Hong Kong: fulfilling the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government’s constitutional obligation, resolving a major legacy issue, plugging the loopholes in the national security mechanism, and solidifying the foundation of social stability. 

Article 23 of the Basic Law stipulates that the “Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People’s Government, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies”. 

The Basic Law is a constitutional document that establishes the governance framework of the HKSAR; the required Article 23 legislation thus is a constitutional responsibility for Hong Kong. Failure to complete the legislation process or indefinitely postponing the legislation is no different from disregarding the Basic Law and a default on a major constitutional responsibility. 

Macao, which also practices “one country, two systems”, already fulfilled its constitutional obligation by enacting its own version of the national security law in March 2009. Hong Kong must not drag its feet. 

The HKSAR government initiated the consultation and bill drafting process for Article 23 legislation at the beginning of 2002. But because of insufficient understanding of “one country, two systems”, Hong Kong society failed to achieve a consensus on the matter. 

The government had to withdraw the bill in September 2003, citing the need for all sections of society to work together and focus on improving the economy and employment situation, which were struggling in the aftermath of SARS.

That the current administration is taking the initiative to relaunch the legislation process demonstrates greater accountability

The central government adopted a tolerant attitude toward the HKSAR government’s decision to postpone the legislation process, and rolled out a number of supporting policies, including the Mainland and Hong Kong Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement and the Individual Visit Scheme, to help lift the city out of its economic downturn, in the hope that the HKSAR government will restart the legislation process after tackling those prevailing economic and livelihood problems. 

However, Hong Kong has undergone several economic cycles, and yet the legislation process has been pigeonholed ever since, with successive administrations citing the absence of “good timing”. 

If social consensus was difficult to forge, then more effort should be devoted to promoting the understanding of the Basic Law and “one country, two systems”. Legal experts could be engaged to help solve any legal issues. It would be irresponsible on the government’s part if the bill was left on the back burner for long. 

That the current administration is taking the initiative to relaunch the legislation process demonstrates greater accountability.

After the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL) came into effect in June 2020, the separatist forces in the city have quickly fallen apart, with the agitators having been kept at bay. Nonetheless, there are still loopholes in the national security mechanism. 

The NSL, which criminalizes four categories of national security offenses, including secession, subversion, terrorist activities, and collusion with a foreign country or external elements to endanger national security, does not cover all acts and activities that endanger national security. 

Article 23 of the Basic Law enumerates seven types of national security offense, two of which are included in the NSL while the other five are not. Legislating for Article 23 will ensure separatists have no legal lacuna to exploit.

Critics, however, assert that safeguarding national security would undermine Hong Kong’s international status and constrain its democratic development, an argument they have been using to try to put national security endeavors on hold. 

One couldn’t help but raise the question: What relations exist between national security, economic and democratic development?

Economic development was prioritized in the past. When the HKSAR government withdrew the national security bill in September 2003, it was believed that everyone should make concerted efforts to push for economic recovery. The proposition was that a thriving economy and a more harmonious society would create a more favorable atmosphere for Article 23 legislation.

What happened in 2019-20 is a painful lesson that enables us to recognize the need to install effective national security “guardrails” to prevent economic and democratic development from going astray again

However, social consensus on safeguarding national security did not materialize when the economy recovered and was in good shape. On the contrary, political agitators missed no opportunity to sow discord between Hong Kong and the Chinese mainland.

The Individual Visit Scheme, which was intended to boost consumption and lift Hong Kong out of its economic recession in the post-SARS period by allowing more mainland residents to visit the city, was vilified by the agitators.

“Democratic development” was also prioritized in the past. Some argued that the more advanced Hong Kong’s democratic system became, the more Hong Kong residents would love their country and their awareness of national security would become stronger.

Sadly, reality proved otherwise. Some took advantage of the absence of national security “guardrails” to ruthlessly challenge the “one country” principle under the banner of democracy. As the anti-extradition turmoil unfolded in 2019, rioters were seen dumping the national flag into sea, desecrating the national flag and national emblem as well as the regional flag and emblem. 

They frequently waved the colonial Dragon and Lion flag while chanting anti-government and anti-China slogans. The insurrection is a grim reminder of how unchecked democracy could wreck the foundation of “one country, two systems”.

Xia Baolong, director of the Hong Kong and Macao Work Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, has reiterated the need to build a robust national security defense line in Hong Kong. 

He admonished that “while Hong Kong may appear to be peaceful and calm, there are indeed undercurrents — the root causes of chaos have not yet been eliminated, and the foundation of orderly governance needs to be fortified”. Xia’s message reflects the central government’s thorough understanding of Hong Kong’s political landscape as well as the emphasis it places on the city’s well-being. 

What happened in 2019-20 is a painful lesson that enables us to recognize the need to install effective national security “guardrails” to prevent economic and democratic development from going astray again. 

A robust national security mechanism will ensure Hong Kong’s development and contribute to its stability and prosperity in the long run.

The author is vice-chairman of the Committee on Liaison with Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and Overseas Chinese of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and chairman of the Hong Kong New Era Development Thinktank.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.