Zhang Xiaoming speech June 8, 2020 translated with DeepL

In the afternoon of June 8, the Hong Kong SAR Government held a web seminar on the 30th anniversary of the promulgation of the Hong Kong Basic Law. The Director was invited to deliver a video keynote speech entitled "The Stronger the Bottom Line of National Security, the Greater the Space for "One Country, Two Systems"". The full text of the speech is as follows.

Dear Chief Executive Mrs Carrie Lam.

Dear guests and friends.

Ten days ago, the National People's Congress passed the "Opinions on the Establishment and Enhancement of the Legal System of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region for Safeguarding National Security and on the Establishment and Enhancement of the Legal System of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region for Safeguarding National Security". Decision on the Implementation Mechanism of the Basic Law ("the Decision"). This is one of the most significant measures taken by the Central Authorities in handling Hong Kong affairs since the reunification and a historic step in the implementation of "one country, two systems". This is a major event of significance and a milestone in the implementation of the Basic Law. As I have said to many of my friends, as long as Hong Kong's national security laws are not in place, it cannot be said that the Basic Law has been fully implemented. On the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the promulgation of the Basic Law of Hong Kong, it is gratifying to see that this deficiency is beginning to be addressed by another form of legislation. Indemnity. I think this is also the best way for us to pay tribute to our forefathers who made historic contributions to the reunification of Hong Kong with the Motherland and the drafting of the Hong Kong Basic Law.

As one of the 2 975 deputies to the current NPC, I am fortunate enough to have participated in and witnessed the deliberations on the Decision at this session of the NPC. The whole process. The thunder of the Great Hall of the People when Vice-Chairman Wang Chen explained his "decision" and when the draft decision was finally passed by a high number of votes. I was struck by the applause - the kind of applause that only bursts out when it has been suppressed for a long time or long-awaited, from people including our compatriots in Hong Kong. The voice of 1.4 billion Chinese people!

I have noticed that during this period of time, there have been various reactions in the Hong Kong community to the "decision", ranging from jubilation and encouragement to smearing and attacking, doubts and worries. There are some who support the "decision". Those who support the "decision" consider that it is an important safeguard for the long-term stability of "one country, two systems", and that "Hong Kong can be saved when the Central Authorities take action". Those who oppose the "decision" claim that "Hong Kong no longer has a high degree of autonomy", "One country, two systems' exists in name only", "'one country, one system' Those who had doubts about the Decision were mainly concerned that the Decision and the Legislative Council would not undermine Hong Kong's judicial independence and the independence of the HKSAR. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council whether the power of final adjudication will affect human rights and freedom? All in all, the concerns are directed more towards the "decision" and the impact of the next NPCSC legislation on "one country, two systems". This also fully illustrates that "one country, two systems" is indeed the biggest convention in the Hong Kong community. This fully illustrates that "one country, two systems" is indeed the greatest common denominator for various sectors of Hong Kong society. In that case, how should we look at the impact of this move of the Central Authorities on the implementation of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong? The point that I would like to share with you today is that the stronger the bottom line of national security is, the more room there is for "one country, two systems". In order to understand this issue, we must first think clearly about several "whys".

First, let's go back to our roots and think about why "one country, two systems" should be implemented.

As we all know, "one country, two systems" was first proposed to solve the Taiwan issue. Why do you propose "one country, two systems" as a solution to the Taiwan problem? In order to achieve the reunification of the motherland, "one country, two systems" was first applied in the process of solving the Hong Kong problem. Later, as the conditions for solving the Hong Kong problem were more mature, "one country, two systems" was first applied in the process of solving the Hong Kong problem. There were two basic considerations for the Central Authorities to use "one country, two systems" to solve the Hong Kong problem: first, to recover Hong Kong and resume the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong, and second, to achieve the unification of the motherland. To safeguard the unity and territorial integrity of the country. Secondly, to maintain the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong. This is clearly stated in the preamble of the Basic Law. On the latter point, Mr DENG Xiaoping spoke at length. When he met with the British Foreign Secretary Geoffrey Howe in July 1984, he said, "In the light of the history and actual situation of Hong Kong and Taiwan, we must take into account the following factors. Without a guarantee that Hong Kong and Taiwan will continue to practise the capitalist system, their prosperity and stability cannot be maintained, nor can a peaceful solution be found for the reunification of the motherland. He also said that if the "one country, two systems" approach was not adopted, Hong Kong would be in chaos. He also said that if the "one country, two systems" approach was not adopted, chaos would arise in Hong Kong and that "even if there were no armed conflict, Hong Kong would still be in chaos. It will become a depressed Hong Kong with many sequelae, not the Hong Kong we want." This is a strategic consideration that embodies the spirit of pragmatism. However, in comparison, Mr DENG Xiaoping placed even greater emphasis on the former consideration.

We are all familiar with Deng's classic interview with Mrs Thatcher on September 24, 1982. From the outset, Deng summed up clearly the basic position of the Chinese Government in solving the Hong Kong problem: "One is sovereignty. Secondly, the question of how China should govern Hong Kong after 1997 in order to maintain Hong Kong's prosperity. The problem is that the Chinese and British Governments have to hold proper discussions on how to ensure that Hong Kong will not have any major problems in the 15 years between now and 1997. fluctuations." Here, Mr. Deng made a hierarchical distinction of the Central Government's policy towards Hong Kong, with the question of sovereignty coming first. He also told Mrs. Thatcher categorically that the question of sovereignty was not an issue for discussion. It can be seen that the issue of sovereignty was at the top of Mr. Deng's agenda from the very beginning when he was conceiving the solution to the Hong Kong problem.

In response to the worries of the Hong Kong community at that time, Mr DENG Xiaoping also talked a number of times about the transition period before the reunification and even the possible emergence of a post-handover Hong Kong. At a meeting with a delegation of Hong Kong and Macau compatriots on the National Day on 3 October 1984, he said, "We should not worry about generalization. Some interventions are necessary. We have to see whether such interference is in the interests of the people of Hong Kong, in the interests of the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong, or whether it is detrimental to the interests of the people of Hong Kong, detrimental to the stability of Hong Kong, or detrimental to the stability of Hong Kong. prosperity and stability of Hong Kong." "Never think that there is no destructive force. This destructive force may come from one side or the other. If there is turmoil, the Central Government will have to intervene. From chaos to governance, should such intervention be welcomed or rejected? They should be welcomed." "There will always be troublemakers, but they must not be made to become troublemakers." "There will be some kind of disturbance, disruptive factors, unsettling factors. Frankly speaking, such a factor will not come from Beijing, but it cannot be ruled out that it exists in Hong Kong, nor can it be ruled out that it comes from some international force. On April 16, 1987, Mr. Deng Xiaoping made another long speech on this subject during his meeting with members of the Basic Law Drafting Committee of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. He said, "There is one more thing that we must make clear. He said, "There is one more thing that must be made clear: Do not think that Hong Kong people are in charge of all matters in Hong Kong and that the Central Authorities do not care about them at all. Everything will be fine. This is unacceptable and unrealistic. It is true that the Central Authorities do not intervene in the specific affairs of the SAR, nor do they need to do so. However, will things that jeopardize the fundamental interests of the country also happen in the SAR? Won't that happen? At that time, did Beijing have a problem? Does it mean that things will not happen in Hong Kong that are detrimental to the fundamental interests of Hong Kong? Can we imagine that Hong Kong will be free of interference and destructive forces? I see no basis for such self-congratulation. If the Central Government gives up all its powers, there may be chaos and confusion, which will harm the interests of Hong Kong. Therefore, maintaining certain powers of the Central Authorities will do no harm to Hong Kong. Let's think about this calmly: will there be times when Hong Kong has problems that cannot be solved without Beijing's intervention? Whenever there was a problem in Hong Kong in the past, the British would always come forward! There are always some things that you can hardly solve without the central government stepping in." "There are some things, for example, if someone in Hong Kong after 1997 curses the Chinese Communist Party, curses China, we still allow him to do so, but if it becomes What should we do if we want to turn Hong Kong into a base for opposing the Mainland under the guise of 'democracy'? Then intervention is a must."

I think that all of you who join me here today in revisiting these words of Deng Gong will be impressed by the extraordinary insight and Foresight, admiration for his foresight! I remember that on 23 September 1993, the last Governor Chris PATTEN put forward his constitutional reform package with "three violations", forcing the Central Authorities to initiate another round of negotiations. After the establishment of the "Preliminary Working Committee", the Central Authorities decided to make public the above remarks made by Mr Deng Xiaoping at his meeting with Mrs Thatcher. He stressed that this speech has "very important practical guiding significance". Today, when we review these words again, it gives us a "special feeling in our hearts". In particular, Mr Deng Xiaoping said that one should never think that there is no destructive force in Hong Kong, that the Central Authorities must retain certain powers, and that intervention is necessary if necessary. The injunctions inculcated in the "one country, two systems" concept, as the original connotation of the idea, are "words of caution" which we need to deeply understand. The Central Authorities have never wavered since the reunification of Hong Kong with the Motherland.

After the reunification of Hong Kong with the Motherland, the Central Authorities have all along insisted on handling Hong Kong affairs in accordance with the principle of "one country, two systems" and have never wavered. Members must have noticed that in a series of important speeches on Hong Kong, President XI Jinping particularly stressed the need to fully and accurately implement the principle of "one country, two systems". We will continue to adopt the "one country, two systems" principle to ensure that the implementation of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong will remain unchanged. At the conference celebrating the 20th anniversary of Hong Kong's reunification with the Motherland and the inauguration ceremony of the Fifth Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, President XI Jinping also openly stated that the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) would continue to implement "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong. The Government of the People's Republic of China declared the three bottom lines under "one country, two systems" that must not be touched, pointing out that "any act that jeopardizes the sovereignty and security of the country, challenges the authority of the Central Authorities and the rule of law of the People's Republic of China shall be regarded as an act of aggression". The authority of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the use of Hong Kong to infiltrate and sabotage activities in the Mainland are all touching on the bottom line and are all decisive in determining the future of Hong Kong. It cannot be allowed." These important statements are targeted at the new situations, problems and challenges that have emerged since Hong Kong's handover, especially in recent years It is the inheritance and development of Mr Deng Xiaoping's idea of "one country, two systems", and it points the way for us to take forward the cause of "one country, two systems" under the new circumstances. It has provided an important guideline for us to follow.

Looking back at history, we should return to our original intention and safeguard our country's sovereignty, security and development interests. This is the core principle of "one country, two systems". On this basis, all actions taken by the Central Government and the SAR Government in accordance with statutory procedures for the purpose of safeguarding national security, including this one, will be subject to the approval of the Legislative Council. It is only natural and justified for the NPC to make the relevant "decision" and for the NPCSC to enact the relevant laws next. If someone questions the Central Authorities' change in the policy of "one country, two systems" for this reason, should he not reflect on his own views on "one country, two systems"? Is it that the Government's understanding of the issue is incomplete, inaccurate or even biased?

Second, face up to the reality and consider why the Central Authorities have to take action to deal with the issue of national security legislation in Hong Kong.

As an ancient Chinese saying goes, "When there is a will, there is a way, and when there is a reason, there is a way". This is a very appropriate description of the action taken by the Central Authorities this time. The development and changes of the situation in Hong Kong have reached a stage where, as Mr Deng Xiaoping said, "the Central Authorities must take action". The Central Authorities' action is necessary and justifiable.

The Central Authorities' action is based on the fact that the actions of the internal and external enemies of Hong Kong have caused prolonged chaos in Hong Kong and endangered national security. Moreover, the activities concerned and the dangers they pose seem to be getting more and more serious. In particular, since the outbreak of the "legislative amendment row" in June last year, some people have continued to carry out all kinds of violent activities, blocking traffic, damaging the MTR. besieging the airport, setting fire to various places, smashing shops, assaulting police officers with lethal weapons, arbitrarily "lynching" ordinary members of the public, and even splashing them in the street They set oil on fire to create tragedies like "burning people alive". They have also concealed and manufactured firearms and ammunition, stockpiled high explosives and placed explosive devices in public places, showing obvious signs of terrorism! They have a criminal tendency. What is even more serious in nature is that some organizations and personnel have blatantly advocated such remarks as "independence of Hong Kong" and "self-determination", and insulted and burned the national flag. Some foreign and Taiwanese forces have even nakedly interfered and interfered in the affairs of Hong Kong, stirring up trouble and fanning the flames and causing waves of trouble for the opposition and the Legislative Council of Hong Kong and other organs of political power. Some foreign and Taiwanese forces have even interfered and interfered in Hong Kong affairs in an undisguised manner, fanning the flames and stirring up trouble, and creating more trouble for the opposition camp and the Legislative Council. The U.S. has also enacted the Hong Kong Bill of Rights and Democracy to directly institutionalize and normalize intervention in Hong Kong by means of domestic laws. The United States has also enacted the Hong Kong Bill of Rights and Democracy Act to institutionalize and normalize its intervention in Hong Kong directly by means of domestic law. These activities not only seriously endanger the social stability, economic prosperity and public security of Hong Kong, but also break the bottom line of "one country, two systems" and seriously undermine the principle of "one country, two systems". It has endangered our national security and created the worst situation in Hong Kong since the reunification, and some say the longest turmoil in Hong Kong's history. As Professor Lau Siu-kai has said, "The biggest difference between this massive storm and previous political struggles in Hong Kong is its impact on the sovereignty of the country. In the past few years, the United States and other external forces have been facing a series of blatant challenges and attacks on our human rights and security, and more seriously, an unprecedented level of intervention by the United States and other external forces". In the face of such a situation, can a responsible government be expected to sit back and do nothing about it? Many friends said that the Central Authorities' action this time was forced by the opposition camp and the radical separatist forces in Hong Kong. To a certain extent, I agree with this statement. They have taken the restraint and tolerance of the Central Government and the SAR Government as weakness and bullying, and they have gone too far!

Of course, if the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) can complete the relevant legislation on its own, the loopholes in the law can be plugged, the law enforcement mechanism can be sounded and the law can be effectively enforced. Naturally, it is not necessary for the Central Authorities to take action to combat such crimes. However, as it is so difficult to pass the National Anthem Bill in the Legislative Council, I am afraid it is even more difficult to complete the national security legislation within the expected time frame. The Central Government's action at this time is an inevitable choice under realpolitik." The Central Authorities' action at this moment is an inevitable choice under realistic politics.


Here, we may as well trace the trajectory of the emergence of "Hong Kong independence" activities in Hong Kong. If we say that for a long period of time after the reunification of Hong Kong, "Hong Kong independence" was still "invisible" and it was even packaged and peddled in the name of "localism", then we can say that "Hong Kong independence" is still a "local phenomenon". In the beginning, when some "open independence" or "secret independence" publications were circulated in the market, some people said that this was freedom of speech and the Government could not interfere. At first, when some "open independence" or "secret independence" publications were circulated in the market, some people said that this was freedom of speech and the government could not interfere. Later on, some student organizations on campus openly stated that "the fate of the Hong Kong nation is up to you", but some people said that this was academic freedom and that the Government should not interfere. It is just a casual remark made by young people who do not know any better and they need to be more "tolerant". In January 2015, the then Chief Executive, Mr LEUNG Chun-ying, in his Policy Address, criticized the University of Hong Kong Students' Union's magazine, The Court, for the following reasons The "Mong Kok riots" occurred on 8 February 2016, and the "Hong Kong independence" advocate issued a stern warning, and some people said he was making a mountain out of a molehill. On February 28th, the Legislative Council By-election for the New Territories East Constituency will be held, which advocates for the "establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region". The high number of votes obtained by candidates of the "independence of Hong Kong" has made them realize that they have to seize political power through elections within the system. The so-called "Hong Kong National Party", a political party advocating "independence of Hong Kong", has announced the establishment of the organization, the platform of which states that it will "establish an independent Republic of Hong Kong". "We started raising funds, recruiting members, publishing publications and setting up election campaigns. I remember when I was interviewed by Phoenix Satellite Television in Hong Kong on April 1, I made what I still consider to be a righteous statement about this I said, "Some people have openly established a political party with the aim of "Independence of Hong Kong". I said, "There is no room for any ambiguity in my response to those who have openly set up a political party with the objective of "independence of Hong Kong". If we are to condone a situation where the subjective intention of the Government is not going to succeed, or where it is impossible to achieve anything, we must be true to the principles of right and wrong. Principles and the bottom line must be upheld, and we must not nurture any abuses, we must prevent them from happening, we must fight them when they are exposed, and we must pursue them relentlessly. At that time, some people said that I was too harsh, and they even said that this would only serve to exalt these young people. Subsequently, we saw a number of newcomers who advocated the "independence of Hong Kong" and "localism" entering the Legislative Council, and a scene of inauguration was staged. The convenor of the "Hong Kong National Party", Chan Ho-tin, has even become a guest of the "Foreign Correspondents' Club" (FCC) and invited him to be a guest of the "Foreign Correspondents' Club" (FCC). The SAR Government has refused to be the person in charge of the FCC and the United Kingdom's Law of the Sea. Some people say that the interpretation of the Basic Law by the NPCSC has led to the disqualification of six Members who have violated the oath of office, and the SAR Government's refusal to be the person in charge of the FCC and the United Kingdom's Law on the Prevention of Bribery. The renewal of working visas in Hong Kong is a symbolic event in the tightening of the Central Government's control over Hong Kong. But why don't they think about the "antecedents" that led to these "consequences"? Why do we not consider why "Hong Kong independence" activities have developed to such a state today? Now, more and more people have learnt a lesson from the painful experience and realized that the "independence of Hong Kong" is a "political virus" as well as a hotbed of terrorist activities. The whole community will have to pay a painful price for this rampant spreading of information, which will become a big problem.

The legal basis for the Central Authorities to take action is based on three basic principles: first, national security affairs are originally under the centralized administration of the Central Authorities; second, the Central Authorities are responsible for the management of the country's economy; and third, the Central Authorities are responsible for the management of the country's economy. Legislation for the protection of national security is inherently a matter of central authority; thirdly, any country will adopt the same approach in combating crimes against national security. Whatever works, don't relent. These principles are universally applicable to all countries, whether unitary or federal. This is true for countries with a unitary system as well as for those with a federal system. The harsh sentences handed down to the independent leaders of the Terran Autonomous Region and Russia's iron fist against the Chechen armies speak for themselves. The FBI, CIA, MI5 and MI6, which are well known to Hong Kong people, are also national security agencies controlled by the federal or central government. (b) the organization concerned. It should be noted that Article 23 of the Basic Law provides that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own to prohibit seven types of acts and activities that endanger national security Although this is a special arrangement under "one country, two systems", which is part of the authorization given by the Central Authorities in respect of national security legislation, it does not change the fact that the Central Authorities are not empowered to legislate on national security. National security legislation is a fundamental attribute of the Central Authorities' power. The Central Authorities bear the greatest and ultimate responsibility for safeguarding national security throughout the country, including the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and are constitutionally empowered to legislate on national security. Power also has a constitutional duty to legislate in a wide range of areas necessary to safeguard national security and to meet the needs of changing circumstances. To continue to build a legal system and enforcement mechanism that meet the needs of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in safeguarding national security. The National People's Congress (NPC) and its Standing Committee, in enacting the relevant legislation on the basis of the provisions of the previous laws, shall be responsible for exercising its sovereign powers and discharging its constitutional responsibilities. This is consistent with Article 31 of the Constitution, which states that "The system to be practiced in the Special Administrative Region shall be prescribed by law by the National People's Congress in accordance with the specific conditions. "and the provisions of item 13 of the powers and functions of the National People's Congress under Article 62, "Determining the Establishment and System of Special Administrative Regions". This is also consistent with the concept of "one country, two systems".

It should also be noted that the establishment of a sound legal system and enforcement mechanism for safeguarding national security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) is also a way to perfect the principle of "one country, two systems". The Nineteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC), which was held three years ago, has put in place a new system of governance and modernized the country's governance system and capacity. "One country, two systems" is confirmed as one of the 14 basic strategies for governing the country. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee last fall further clarified this topic and task. The Chinese Communist Party is the ruling party of our country, and the unified plan made at the Plenary Session of the Party's Central Committee must be implemented in practice. Therefore, as I said earlier, I only "agree in part that the Central Government's action was forced by the opposition and the radical separatist forces", because the Central Government is not a party to the conflict. It is only because the "legislative amendment controversy" has highlighted the risk to national security that the Government has made the necessary preparations for the relevant work at an early stage. This move is all the more urgent and can brook no delay.

Thirdly, think rationally and consider why the central government has repeatedly stressed that the national security legislation targets only a very small number of people.

Rationality is the light in times of confusion and the sobering agent in times of impulse. Only by thinking rationally can we not be confused by all sorts of specious views or even confusing right and wrong. This is a very important issue in Hong Kong nowadays. This is extremely important in Hong Kong nowadays.

During the "two sessions" of the National People's Congress and the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, Han Zheng, a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, Vice-Premier of the State Council, head of the Central Leading Group for the Work of Hong Kong and Macao Affairs, and Chairman of the Central Working Group for the Work of Hong Kong and Macao Affairs of the Central People's Government, made the following remarks. Mr. Xia Baolong, Executive Deputy Head of the Leading Group, Vice Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), and Director of the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, met with Hong Kong deputies to the National People's Congress (NPC) and Hong Kong deputies to the CPPCC. All CPPCC members have said at times that the NPC decision and the NPCSC legislation target only the secession and subversion of the country. In this connection, I would like to point out that the Government's policy on Hong Kong's sovereignty over the territory, its organization of terrorist activities and the acts and activities of foreign and extra-territorial powers interfering in the affairs of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region are targeted at the following areas. The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) has been criticizing the forces of "Hong Kong independence", "black violence" and "channelling". A few days ago, while listening to the views of Chief Executive Carrie Lam and the relevant officials of the SAR Government on the issue of national security legislation, Vice-Premier Han Zhengzheng also said that he was not sure if the Government would be able to make a decision on the issue. It was further made clear that the legislation punished criminal acts and activities that endangered national security and were engaged in by a very small number of people. Hong Kong residents generally enjoy and exercise various rights and freedoms in accordance with the law. Combining the relevant provisions of the "Decision" and the explanations of Vice Chairman Wang Chen, we can give the following common interpretation of the messages of the speeches. It is also an important criminal policy confirmed by the Central Authorities. Secondly, the scope of application of the relevant legislation is strictly limited, and the penalties are only applicable to those who have committed the four types of offences and activities mentioned above, as opposed to the vast majority of them. Secondly, the scope of application of the relevant legislation is strictly limited, and only the acts and activities of the four types of offences mentioned above are punishable. A few Hong Kong residents have nothing to do with it. It is because these four types of acts and activities are the most damaging and the most prominent risk points affecting national security. As for other general offences against national security, ordinary criminal offences, economic offences, etc., they are not within the scope of this Law. Rather, it should be dealt with in accordance with the relevant existing laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and some laws that should be "activated" should be "activated" and should not remain dormant. Thirdly, the provisions of the relevant legislation on the enforcement mechanism, including the establishment in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of organizations of the relevant organs of the Central Authorities for the protection of national security. The Government and its authorities will be guided by the principle of effectively preventing, prohibiting and punishing the above four types of criminal acts and activities, with full respect for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The HKSAR shall be vested with independent judicial power, including that of final adjudication. Fourthly, all relevant legislation, law enforcement and judicial actions will fully protect the various rights and freedoms enjoyed by Hong Kong residents in accordance with law, and are in line with the Basic Law. The modern principle and spirit of the rule of law will not widen the scope of the crackdown, nor will they fabricate charges or commit crimes against people arbitrarily.

The reason for emphasizing rational thinking is that the opposition and some external forces have long been good at playing a trick, which is to make the Central Authorities and the SAR Government look like a bunch of miscreants. The relevant laws and measures taken by the Government have been subjected to mischievous and demonizing measures, which have raised alarmist talk, misled the public and created panic. In the "legislative amendment controversy", the rumour that "everyone will be transferred to the Mainland to stand trial and go to jail after the passage of the legislative amendments" has made many people go to jail. The street! This time, they will be up to their old tricks. Recently, I have heard some rumours, especially those targeting the Central Government's national security agency in Hong Kong. We have arrested people at will and sent them to the Mainland for trial, and so on. All these are actually not worth refuting. Even national security agencies have to act strictly in accordance with the law when handling cases on the Mainland, and there are strict procedural restrictions, so how can they be rendered useless in Hong Kong? How about being free?

Needless to say, there is also a deep-rooted problem here, which is the understanding and trust of some Hong Kong people in our country, especially in the Mainland. The problem of a lack of understanding and trust in the rule of law in the Mainland. After more than 40 years of efforts since the reform and opening up of China, the country has made universally recognized progress in the development of the rule of law. Otherwise, how can we explain why mainland China is the place that attracts the most foreign investment? Why have more than 2 million Taiwan residents, an increasing number of Hong Kong residents and foreigners chosen Mainland China as a place of permanent residence? As far as the criminal justice system is concerned, several friends from the legal profession in Hong Kong have told me that there is not much difference between the Mainland and Hong Kong. The Mainland also adheres to the principle of due process in the handling of cases and insists on the principle of legality, nullum crimen sine lege and proportionality of punishment. The presumption of innocence and the principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty are strictly adhered to, and the principle of excluding illegal evidence is strictly adhered to, and the burden of proof to prove the guilt of the defendant rests with the prosecution. In addition, the right to defence and other litigation rights enjoyed by criminal suspects, defendants and other participants in litigation are fully protected in accordance with the law. It is worth mentioning in particular that in recent years, all court documents at all levels and in all types of courts in the Mainland have to be uploaded on the Internet for the supervision of the whole society. After visiting the case database information system of the Supreme People's Court, a number of Hong Kong judges have highly praised the system.

Fourthly, dialectical thinking. Why do we not see this move by the Central Government as an opportunity for Hong Kong to set things right and get out of its predicament?

If we take 50 years as a time frame, the implementation of "one country, two systems" has already entered the middle stage. As an unprecedented initiative, its successes have been recorded in history. In particular, there has been a smooth handover, a smooth transition, no change in system, a high degree of autonomy, freedom and openness, and the rapid development of the economy in the wake of the two international financial crises. The recovery of the Soviet Union, and so on, has exceeded the prediction of many people. However, as with any new thing, in the course of exploring and moving forward, the implementation of "one country, two systems" has encountered some roadblocks and encountered the following The challenges have revealed some problems, including the limitations of the design of the top system and the inadequacy of the actual work. There are areas where we can reflect and improve. In particular, problems in the areas of governance and the hearts of the people have become more prominent, so much so that Professor Cheng Wing-yen, Director of the Institute of East Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore, and others, have been forced to take the lead. Internationally renowned scholars have proposed a new proposition, that is, Hong Kong needs a "second reunification".

So, what is the main problem of Hong Kong now? The answer will undoubtedly be a matter of opinion. In my view, the main problem of Hong Kong is not the economy, nor is it the housing, employment and other livelihood problems that are troubling the grassroots, nor is it the interests of the grassroots. It is not a social problem, such as the solidification of social classes and the difficulty of upward mobility for young people, but a political problem. The central manifestation of this is that there are serious differences and even confrontations over the fundamental question of what kind of Hong Kong we want to build. We want to build a Hong Kong that truly implements "one country, two systems" and "Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong", with a high degree of autonomy, while maintaining long-term prosperity and stability. On the other hand, the opposition and the external forces behind them have attempted to turn Hong Kong into an independent or semi-independent political entity, into an anti-Chinese and anti-communist political entity, and into a political entity with a strong political base. As a bridgehead, Hong Kong has become a pawn of external forces to check and curb China's development. This is the major contradiction affecting the full and accurate implementation of "one country, two systems" and the maintenance of Hong Kong's long-term prosperity and stability, and it is a major factor in the political life of Hong Kong society. This major contradiction determines the chaos and the intensification of some social conflicts.

From the phenomenon, what we see is more of a highly politicized, pan-politicized and populist society. It is the lack of defense for national security, the difficulty in implementing national education, the negative coverage of the country in the media, and the fact that the country is not a safe place. The absurdity of the school examination questions is the result of various comments and moves to isolate Hong Kong from the Mainland and to provide room and impetus for Hong Kong's development. The construction of the Greater Bay Area of Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macao has been boycotted, and so on. In essence, this is a political confrontation deliberately created by anti-Chinese and anti-communist forces inside and outside Hong Kong. Their goal is not only to destabilize Hong Kong and seize power in Hong Kong, but also to overthrow the state power and subvert the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. It is not the case that Hong Kong is a "Trojan horse" embedded in the internal affairs of China. Is it not true that some people have been clamouring in published articles that Hong Kong should become a "Trojan horse" embedded in China? Didn't someone vow to "fight for America"? Didn't the statement made by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo at the end of May also reveal that "the United States once hoped that a free and prosperous Hong Kong would serve as a base for authoritarianism, and that Hong Kong would be a place where people could live in freedom and prosperity? Does China provide a role model"? Therefore, the judgments I have mentioned above are not our speculations, but their real delusions. I think the time has come for us to "open the window and speak frankly". It is only when the essence of the Hong Kong problem is uncovered and explained thoroughly, and when we do not hide our illnesses and scruple to cure them, and when we have the courage to face up to the major contradictions and problems that exist, that we can possibly Find the right cure. Of course, the causes of social problems are more complicated than physical illnesses, and it is much more difficult to treat them.

The decisive measures taken by the Central Authorities this time to establish and improve Hong Kong's national security legal system and enforcement mechanism at the national level show that the Central Authorities have taken a positive attitude towards Hong Kong. The determination and will to rectify the situation is a stopgap measure to address both the symptoms and the root causes of the problem, with the aim of safeguarding national security and ensuring "one country, two systems". The purpose of "two systems" is to help Hong Kong get out of the chaos and predicament and back on the right track as soon as possible. If we allow the situation in Hong Kong to continue to develop under the domination of the opposition and some external forces, or even to follow their tunes and their designs, we will not be able to achieve our goal. If Hong Kong can find a way out by hastily implementing the so-called "genuine universal suffrage", Hong Kong will only be caught in a vicious circle in which society will become more and more divided. Not only will our prosperity and stability become unsustainable, but "one country, two systems" may also be destroyed by them. I have also noticed that many people in Hong Kong are already looking ahead to the fate of "one country, two systems" after 2047. Next, what kind of record will Hong Kong use to get a new mandate from the National People's Congress and the people of the country it represents at that time?


Some people say that the Central Authorities have resorted to extreme force this time, and they are worried that the Legislative Council for National Security will not control Hong Kong to death and that "one country, two systems" will not be implemented. "Will the space be compressed as a result. As has been said, I think that if there is a dialectical relationship between the two, then it should be: the firmer the bottom line of national security," There is more and more room for "one country, two systems". From the economic perspective, it is foreseeable that with the enactment of legislation, Hong Kong society will regain stability, the business and investment environment will improve, and the Central Authorities will be more concerned about the future of Hong Kong. The Central Authorities will definitely give greater support to Hong Kong, including the issue of consolidating Hong Kong's status as an international financial centre, which is a matter of public concern. No effort has been spared to support it. Last month, the Chief Executive, Mr Carrie LAM, just submitted a report to the Central Government on the proposals in this regard. A friend from the financial sector in Hong Kong recently shared with us a view that the GDP of the world's largest international financial centres and the total number of listed companies are not the same. Recently, a friend in the financial sector in Hong Kong shared with us the view that the GDP of the world's major international financial centres and the total number of listed companies are the same. The ratio of market capitalization is basically 1:1, except for Hong Kong which is 1:14. the $13 more that Hong Kong has over other financial centers is China's money is the world's money. The Hong Kong capital market is not a market for Hong Kong at all, but a market for China and the world. Therefore, as long as China's economy remains on a sound path of development, and as long as the Central Government continues to attach great importance to the special status of Hong Kong, and continues to attach great importance to the development of Hong Kong's capital markets, Hong Kong's capital markets are not the market of Hong Kong, but the market of China and the world. The role and function of the super-connector between the world and Mainland China, as long as the Central Authorities continue to make efforts in a difficult international economic environment. If we support Hong Kong, is there any reason to worry about Hong Kong's status as an international financial centre? From the perspective of people's livelihood, it is indeed very difficult to solve problems such as housing, employment and poverty solely by relying on Hong Kong's own conditions, but for the sake of our country. The introduction of any major policy to support it may produce an effect that cannot be underestimated. From the point of view of the protection of freedom and human rights, apart from the fear that a very small number of people who have committed crimes and "kowtowed" to the State may have, the protection of freedom and human rights for the public at large is also a matter of concern. For them, the legislation means more than anything else that they are protected. They will have freedom from the fear of black violence, freedom to ride the subway, freedom to go to the mall, freedom to tell the truth on the street without being afraid. The freedom to be "private". In particular, we don't have to worry about our underage children, we don't have to worry about them being "brainwashed", we don't have to worry about their impulsiveness. There is still hope for the future of Hong Kong if a criminal record is left behind, ruining the whole of one's life and leaving one's heart broken. Is this not a turning point for Hong Kong to get out of its predicament and turn chaos into governance? To sum up, the clearer the bottom line of national security and the stronger the barrier, the more stable and prosperous Hong Kong will be, and the greater the chance for our compatriots and the people of the motherland to live together. The closer the relationship, the more Hong Kong's strengths come to the fore, the greater the room for free development, the stronger the vitality of social innovation, and the greater the impact on the deepening of China's reform and opening up and the development of its economy. The contribution to the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation will also become greater and greater.

Not long ago, when I was watching television, I saw a female Hong Kong citizen who was asked by a reporter whether she was worried about the Central Authorities enacting national security laws for Hong Kong. In response to a question raised by the Secretary, he asked five questions in one breath, "Such legislation can be found in any country or place in the world, why can Hong Kong not have such legislation? If Hong Kong cannot stand on its own, why can't our country? What are you afraid of if you are not engaged in crimes against national security? If you have sinned, why should you not be punished? Who are you, and why do you have privileges beyond the law?" I admire Ms. Yuan's ability to think independently and logically, and her ability to make simple but profound points in a few short sentences.

I have said four "whys" above, but I have also said a lot of straightforward things. To save time, I would like to conclude by asking you to think of a final question: Who is truly for Hong Kong? Are they the ones who curse our country in the media, badmouth Hong Kong everywhere, and beg for intervention in foreign countries? Are they the ones who fantasize about the "color revolution" in China and wait to see the "beautiful scenery" in the streets of Hong Kong? ........ At a time when Hong Kong is once again faced with the critical choice of which way to go, there is a greater need for collective rationality.

In November last year, when the "legislative amendment controversy" was raging, President Xi Jinping attended the BRICS leaders' meeting in Brazil. He said, "The Chinese Government is determined to uphold the sovereignty, security and development interests of the country and to implement the 'one country, two systems' principle. We are resolute in our determination to uphold the 'two systems' principle, and resolute in our determination to oppose any interference in Hong Kong's affairs by external forces. These three sentences are so eloquent that they have the power to make a difference. I firmly believe that no matter what happens next, no matter what people outside Hong Kong think, the situation in Hong Kong will never be the same. The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC) will smoothly complete the relevant legislation in accordance with the statutory procedures and ensure the landing in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, regardless of what it says or does. The implementation of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong will definitely be safer, smoother and more effective. With this piece of legislation, antivirus software will be installed in the implementation of "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong, which will definitely run more safely, more smoothly and more effectively. Lasting!

Thank you all!