Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) strongly condemns and must resolutely refute the untruthful remarks, slanders and smears against various aspects of the HKSAR in the so-called six-monthly report on Hong Kong: January to June 2026 of the United Kingdom (UK) today (October 23).
A spokesman for the HKSAR Government stressed, “The HKSAR is an inalienable part of the People’s Republic of China, and as a local administrative region that enjoys a high degree of autonomy under the principle of ‘One Country, Two Systems’, comes directly under the jurisdiction of the Central People’s Government. The HKSAR steadfastly safeguards national sovereignty, security and development interests, and fully and faithfully lives up to this top priority of the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ principle. The HKSAR Government strongly condemns and firmly rejects the UK’s attempt through a so-called six-monthly report to make misleading and irresponsible remarks about Hong Kong matters, distort facts and reverse right and wrong, and attempt to interfere in the HKSAR Government’s law-based governance by despicable political maneuvers.”
“The core essence of the Sino-British Joint Declaration is about China’s resumption of the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong. It did not authorise the UK to interfere in Hong Kong’s affairs after its return to the motherland. The UK has no sovereignty, jurisdiction or right of supervision over Hong Kong after its return to the motherland. The HKSAR Government strongly urges the UK again to discern facts from fallacies, respect the international law and basic norms governing international relations, and immediately stop its long-arm jurisdiction and interference in Hong Kong matters, which are purely China’s internal affairs.”
Safeguarding Rights and Freedoms
The HKSAR Government spokesman said, “The HKSAR Government steadfastly safeguards the rights and freedoms enjoyed by Hong Kong people as protected under the law. Since Hong Kong’s return to the motherland, human rights in the city have always been robustly guaranteed constitutionally by both the Constitution and the Basic Law. The offences endangering national security stipulated by the Hong Kong National Security Law (HKNSL) and the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance (SNSO) target acts endangering national security with precision, and define the elements and penalties of the offences with clarity. The relevant laws do not affect normal exchanges of local institutions, organisations and individuals with other countries, regions and international organisations including the United Nations. Law-abiding persons will not unwittingly violate the law.”
“Since the implementation of the HKNSL and the SNSO, the media landscape in Hong Kong has remained vibrant. However, some people with ulterior motives deliberately fabricated facts about freedom of the press and speech in Hong Kong. In fact, freedom of the press and speech are firmly protected in Hong Kong at a constitutional level under the Basic Law, but they are not absolute. The media, like everyone else, have an obligation to abide by all the laws. The media continue to enjoy the freedom to comment on and criticise government policies without any restriction, as long as this is not in violation of the law. The court further cited precedents from the European Court of Human Rights regarding press freedom in the reasons for a verdict of a relevant case, pointing out that the European Convention on Human Rights does not guarantee a wholly unrestricted freedom of speech even with respect to press coverage on matters of serious public concern. The most crucial point is that journalists must act in good faith and on accurate factual basis and provide reliable and precise information in accordance with the tenets of ‘responsible journalism’ in order to enjoy the protection of their rights to freedom of speech and press freedom. The so-called ‘World Press Freedom Index’ cited in the report was published by an organisation self-claimed as ‘Reporters Without Borders’. Its funding has largely come from the European Union, the United States (US) State Department and other European governments, which merely serves as a tool for anti-China forces for the US and some western countries. The so-called ‘rankings’ lack credibility and can be disregarded. In fact, in recent years, the police of the UK have on numerous occasions arrested journalists in the name of counter-terrorism, including the recent arrest in Leicestershire of several journalists covering pro-Palestinian activities. This further highlights that the so-called safeguard of press freedom by the UK is merely a double standard in serving political ends.”
“As to the case regarding the father of an absconder named Anna Kwok Fung-yee being convicted of ‘attempting to deal with, directly or indirectly, any funds or other financial assets or economic resources belonging to, or owned or controlled by, a relevant absconder’ as mentioned in the so-called report, as stressed in the Reasons for Sentence, the purpose of the relevant offence is to prevent anyone from dealing with the assets of an absconder, thereby increasing the chance of such absconder refusing to return to Hong Kong. The nature of the case was also considered serious, and it was reiterated that no ‘collective punishment’ is involved in the case and that the sentence has nothing to do with whether the defendant is related to the absconder.”
Safeguarding Due Administration of Justice and Rule of Law