CNA: This discuss the reasoning behind several schemes under the national security law. Could you merely explain whether the judgments required a majority of the politicians ‘ votes?
Regina Ip: I tried to implement Article 23 up in 2003.
We failed to control the storyline and the media emotion, in my opinion. The main issue was that we did not have enough seats, though. We did not receive enough votes because one important pro-government group cut it.
But then, this time is different.
I believe that the vast majority of Hong Kong residents are aware that protecting national security is crucial after the 2019 unrest. Otherwise, we wo n’t have a day of peace and quiet. And the government is free of the anti-China elements who have long been against anyone involving China.
So, we passed the bill in seven times and signed it into law on March 19; however, during the Bill investigation process, which included me, the state accepted 91 modifications.
CNA: Did it surprise you that the act was only passed in that time frame?
Regina Ip: When the federal consulted me, my counsel was not to perform a three- fortnight consultation. As little as possible feasible, because people are now fully aware of the tenets and purposes of national security policy.  ,
And with any piece of legislation, the longer, the more time you spend poring over it, you’re bound to find more flaws. People are bound to find unique loopholes, so to get it done, a little conversation time is enough.
CNA: But of course, some apartments of society also believe that the dark line is questionable.
Regina Ip: The purple lines will come out from the judge decisions. You may just learn the dark outlines after a laws has been tested and applied in court.
For instance, the first event in which a younger man was prosecuted for independence, advocating Hong Kong independence – the case of Tong Ying System, you know, a young man who charged at the officers on a bicycle with flags saying:” Liberate Hong Kong, Revolutions of the Times”. The judge ruled that these thoughts are rebel, they mean promoting Hong Kong freedom.  ,
But obviously, the dark line is it. If you do it, you advocate. If you go to a group and say:” Rescue Hong Kong, this is rebellion of the days”. That says, evidently out of bounds.
So the red lines may come out of court decisions, you know, and they are coming out bit by bit.
The government has stated repeatedly that the most important elements of criminal law are a legal goal. You do everything consciously, and there has to be some action.  ,
For instance, someone questioned,” If I have a pile of Apple Daily media ‘ front pages promoting Hong Kong independence under my bed, I forgot about it , – do I get accused of having seditious materials now” as an example during our attention of the Bill.
If you left it under your bed by accident? Or if you keep it … for teaching law, what is the law on sedition? If you do n’t have any criminal intent and are n’t stirring up hatred, you ca n’t possibly commit an offence.  ,
So the government and I have all been working very hard to explain the nature of criminal law.  ,
I believe that those who are concerned should examine the law. The two elements in criminal law are mens rea, meaning criminal intent, and actus reus, meaning you have to do something.
Also, look at the numbers in the past four years. Ever since this law has been enacted, how many people have been arrested? 297. And how many have admitted guilt or entered guilty pleas? 120.
A recent arrest was made in accordance with our new law, this locally adopted law, but it involved the same group of people. Most people do n’t really care about the national security law, unless they have an endangering one’s.
So, it’s a very small number of bad actors intent on endangering national security. Other people have no cause for concern.
CNA: We talk about the global impact. For instance, the West has expressed concern that national security measures are fostering a sense of fear.
Regina Ip: In Hong Kong, there is no atmosphere of fear.
There are still 84, 000 Americans in Hong Kong, 1, 300 US enterprises, 300, 000 Canadians, and large numbers of Australians. They are aware that Hong Kong is secure and not prone to avert risk.
Of course, the Western media has been highly biased. They frame these bad actors as freedom fighters, you know, people who fight for democracy or freedom. Actually, the reality is very different.
Although this kind of negative publicity has had a toll on Hong Kong, our tourism numbers are rising, and there are no shortage of Five Eyes country officials, former officials, scholars traveling through Hong Kong, and people visiting there. There’s no problem whatsoever.
I think we must keep explaining. I do encourage the government to do more face- to- face engagements, other than just issuing a press release.
CNA: The Department of Justice now has more room to file an appeal against acquittals and for early release to be voided in accordance with Article 23. What is the balance here, with reintegration of the young activists who took part in 2019 ( protests )?
Is it really the best way to reconcile with young people if you just let them off without acknowledging the legal repercussions of the harm they have caused to society?
Because people immediately demanded amnesty after the riots broke out and said to” just let the young people go free.”  ,
If these young people do n’t understand the legal ramifications, I do n’t believe that is a good way to reconcile, rebuild our society, or assist them.
You know, during the riots, our police have not fatally injured anyone. However, some of the young people have left after a brick was used to kill and ignite one person. They could not be traced.
CNA: What steps does the government take to ensure that they reintegrate into society and become productive members?
Regina Ip: Well, our Correctional Services Department has a rehabilitation programme , – retraining and rehabilitation , – and they do a good job.
But as you can see, some of these young people have a lot of trust in our authorities. One of them, Agnes Chow, was allowed to go abroad. She immediately went out to denounce Hong Kong after receiving her passport back.
So, can you really trust, or can all young people be trusted? They ask for leniency, but do they really understand, accept that they have damaged society and a lot of damage to our country and society?
I believe that everyone should try to comprehend and accept Hong Kong for what it is. We are part of China, just like Guangzhou or Hangzhou. Our country’s red lines are our red lines, where we do have a different way of life. We have a capitalist system, we have far greater freedom of expression, different forms of freedoms, and much stronger protection of human rights than many other democratic societies.
I’m hoping that people will see our situation and accept it.