On Tuesday, a Hong Kong court sentenced 45 people involved in a widely watched subversion case, handing down prison terms ranging from four years and two months to 10 years. People in the community have different opinions on the severity of punishment, but they generally agree that the verdict is correct, fair and long overdue.
This ruling is crucial to consolidating and strengthening the rule of law in Hong Kong, and its political impact is even more significant.
First, this case highlights the critical role of the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL) in safeguarding national security and Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability. This case can be considered the most significant since Hong Kong’s return to the motherland. It involves recognizing or not recognizing Hong Kong’s constitutional order under the “one country, two systems” principle and the Basic Law. The core goal of those involved in the so-called “35-plus” case was not only to seize power in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region through illegal means but also to take this opportunity to undermine the prestige of Hong Kong’s political system and distort its normal operation. The ruling in this case thus highlights the indispensable role of the NSL in safeguarding “one country, two systems” and the Basic Law. It also upholds and consolidates Hong Kong’s constitutional order.
Second, external forces, especially the United States and its allies, repeatedly and blatantly use this case to discredit the international image of the country and Hong Kong and slander the city’s rule of law, thereby intending to shield and protect their “agents” in Hong Kong. They have repeatedly exerted political pressure on HKSAR government officials, prosecutors and judges, threatened them with sanctions, coerced them not to perform their duties, and required them to act according to the instructions of the US and its allies. These malicious behaviors not only trample on Hong Kong’s rule of law and judicial independence but also challenge China’s sovereignty over Hong Kong. In the face of intense pressure from the US and its allies, HKSAR government officials and judicial officers fearlessly prosecuted, tried and sentenced those involved in the case. This prevented the US and its allies from succeeding in their political interference in the rule of law in Hong Kong. It also demonstrated the HKSAR’s courage, determination and ability to safeguard the integrity of the rule of law. It thereby allowed the international community to have a deeper understanding and respect for Hong Kong’s rule of law.
Recently, politicians and media in the US and the West have been pointing fingers at Jimmy Lai Chee-ying’s prosecution and unreasonably asked the HKSAR government to stop prosecuting him. Otherwise, Hong Kong will face “dire consequences”. Such unreasonable and brutal demands from politicians of the US and the West reveal their disrespect for Hong Kong’s rule of law and judicial independence and have failed. The outcome of this subversion trial should let external forces understand that Hong Kong will never surrender to them on the issue of rule of law. Of course, external forces will not give up, but they should also realize through the verdict of this case that their political capability in Hong Kong is minimal.
Third, the ruling in this case will further change Hong Kong residents’ views and perceptions of the rule of law. The anti-China forces in Hong Kong have long disseminated a set of fallacies about the rule of law to their supporters and residents, especially young people, and have caused many negative impacts. They boasted that if they put forward some lofty political ideals, instigated actions to fight for “democracy” and “human rights”, and gained support from the US, the West and other external forces, even if they engaged in illegal behavior, it would only be an act of “violating the law to achieve justice”. They believed the central and HKSAR governments would not dare to take legal action against them and would only let their behavior that undermines the rule of law in Hong Kong be ignored or “tolerated reluctantly”. For this reason, even though the NSL was promulgated and implemented on June 30, 2020, the anti-China forces in Hong Kong and overseas continued to engage in behavior that violated the law with a contemptuous attitude. Their goal was to instill in the minds of Hong Kong residents that there is no need to respect the national security laws. The ruling in this case shows the will and determination of the HKSAR government to use the NSL to bring to justice those who conspire to subvert the HKSAR’s governance system. It will allow supporters of the anti-China forces and most residents to understand the dignity and power of the law. They will no longer take chances and no longer think that by using the banner of “violating the law to achieve justice” and leveraging support from external forces, they could treat the law as if it were nothing in Hong Kong, which will be beneficial to strengthening the rule of law and improving the spirit of law-abidingness in Hong Kong.
After the court concludes Lai’s case soon, all the culprits and main participants who planned and led the severe uprisings in Hong Kong over the past decade should have received the legal punishment they deserve. With no successors left, the turbulent period that has plagued Hong Kong for a long time after the establishment of the HKSAR should have ended entirely, and Hong Kong’s development will enter a bright new stage
Fourth, the anti-China forces in Hong Kong and overseas used to be arrogant and overbearing because they believed that external forces were their firm backers. Since the implementation of the NSL and the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance (SNSO), and some local laws that are beneficial to safeguarding national security and Hong Kong stability, such as the Crimes Ordinance and the Public Order Ordinance, have been “activated”, many leaders and active participants of anti-China forces have been brought to justice and jailed. This shows that external forces cannot, or are unwilling to, “protect” or “rescue” them and have abandoned them mercilessly except for offering occasional “verbal protests and rhetoric” to express support for them. They have been regarded as abandoned “chess pieces” and are no longer treasured by external forces as having any political value or utility. Furthermore, they are even considered political baggage and an embarrassment to the US and other Western governments and politicians to a certain extent. In fact, during the trial of this case and Jimmy Lai’s case, a large amount of evidence of collusion between anti-China forces and external forces was presented to the court and widely reported by the media, vividly exposing the deep and longstanding involvement of external forces in Hong Kong’s political turmoil since its return to China. The disgraceful role played by external forces in the city over the years has contributed much to national security education and political awareness among the people of Hong Kong.
Finally, the ruling in this case further contributed to the terminal decline of the anti-China forces and the external forces in Hong Kong and overseas. Under the protective umbrella of the NSL, the SNSO and other relevant local laws, the anti-China forces and external forces have little room for survival and operation in the city. By now, their supporters and potential supporters should have realized that the legal risks of jeopardizing national security and Hong Kong’s stability are incredibly high. There will only be fewer people, including young people, interested or motivated to participate in their plans and actions. Their “mass base” will become increasingly narrow, and their political capacity will continue to shrink.
After the court concludes Lai’s case soon, all the culprits and main participants who planned and led the severe uprisings in Hong Kong over the past decade should have received the legal punishment they deserve. With no successors left, the turbulent period that has plagued Hong Kong for a long time after the establishment of the HKSAR should have ended entirely, and Hong Kong’s development will enter a bright new stage.
The author is a professor emeritus of sociology, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and a consultant for the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
