When the British prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, issued the UK’s Strategic Defense Review on June 2, he said his first duty was “to keep the British people safe”. His counterparts elsewhere have a similar duty, and it is achieved in various ways.

For example, the UK’s National Security Act 2023 gives the authorities the power to prosecute individuals for particular national security offenses even if they were committed outside the UK, regardless of whether or not they are British citizens. The Act’s extraterritorial reach is intended to protect the UK from threats that originate or manifest themselves outside the country. Malign individuals, therefore, are put on notice that there will be consequences if they try to harm the UK from foreign bases.

The UK’s Five Eyes partners have similar laws, as does the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Like Starmer, they recognize the importance of keeping their people safe, and Hong Kong, which has faced particular threats in recent years, is no exception.

In 2022, a group of China-hostile activists based in Canada created an “electoral committee” that would lay the groundwork for a “Hong Kong Parliament” (HKP) in exile. Its purpose was to hold an election that “represents, solidifies and revives Hong Kong’s people’s rights of self-determination”. Once the HKP was functional, a constitution for Hong Kong would be formulated, with self-determination — a precursor to independence — being pursued.

The group was led by Alan Keung Ka-wai, who was imprisoned in Hong Kong in 2023 for seditious activity. Although he was initially based in Taiwan, the authorities ordered him to leave for reasons unknown (Voice of America reported it was unrelated to the proposed election).

The election was finally organized on June 30, and 15,702 votes were reportedly cast, with 18 candidates vying for 15 places. Some candidates either belonged to or were affiliated with the Taiwan-based Hong Kong Democratic Independence Alliance, which advocates an independent Hong Kong (four of its members were arrested in Hong Kong on July 9, suspected of subversive activity).

Once the winners were chosen (including Keung), a virtual swearing-in ceremony was held on July 14. Its proposed agenda includes the drafting of a “Hong Kong constitution”, with matters escalating thereafter.

After the election, however, presumably realizing they were playing with fire, five of the successful candidates either refused to be sworn in or resigned from the group.

Of the successful candidates, six were reportedly Taiwan-based, while one lived in Thailand. The others, not surprisingly, were based in Five Eyes countries (four in the UK, three in the US, and the remainder in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand).

As the group’s activities posed a direct threat to China’s territorial integrity, the Hong Kong Police Force, which is responsible for pursuing those who violate the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL), acted in the country’s defense. Since the offenses were committed elsewhere, this involved recourse to the NSL’s extraterritorial powers.

On July 25, the police announced that they had placed 19 suspects, all based outside Hong Kong, on its wanted list, for suspected subversion (NSL Art 22). Rewards were also offered for information leading to their apprehension. They were accused of committing national security offenses by organizing, enabling or participating in, outside Hong Kong, “a subversive organization named the Hong Kong Parliament”. 

Whereas nine of the suspects were accused of organizing the election that would lead to the establishment of the HKP, 10 were suspected of participating in the election, and then taking an oath to join as “members of the Hong Kong Parliament”.

The HKP, said the police, was a body which, by using unlawful means, would seek to subvert State power, promote self-determination, and overthrow or undermine the political systems in both Hong Kong and the Chinese mainland.

As the suspects were outside Hong Kong, the police urged them to surrender themselves voluntarily, pointing out that the NSL envisaged leniency when this occurs.

Although the HKP might appear farcical to some, its facilitators hoped to use it to wreck the “one country, two systems” policy, meaning it has to be taken seriously. Like the imperialists of old, they want to humiliate China. And like the insurrectionists of 2019, they want to divide China. 

However, the police acted decisively to frustrate the plotters. If not yet out for the count, they have at least been dealt a significant blow. Not surprisingly, this has infuriated the Five Eyes. 

In a joint statement, the UK’s foreign and home secretaries, David Lammy and Yvette Cooper, condemned “another example of transnational repression … which encourages reckless behavior on UK soil”.

They also disclosed they were taking steps to terminate the (currently suspended) UK-Hong Kong extradition system, by removing Hong Kong from the list of places specified in the Extradition Act 2003. This fatuous move will not only delight the subversives who are being allowed to plot China’s destabilization from their British bases, but also, for example, fraudsters, sex offenders, and child pornographers, who will now also be able to evade justice.

The Five Eyes must clearly understand that the threats to China they have countenanced will be firmly countered. Although Hong Kong is small, it knows how to defend itself from bullies and those who wish it ill

Lammy, who has previously shown his sympathy with those who want to undermine Hong Kong, notoriously invited four national security suspects to visit him on Jan 21 (shortly after arrest warrants had been issued for them in Hong Kong). However, although he and his subordinates have sought to justify subversive activity directed at China on “freedom of expression and freedom of assembly” grounds, nobody should be fooled. 

Although Lammy’s acquiescence in hostile political plotting by Hong Kong exiles shames the UK, it delights its Five Eyes partners.

Indeed, the Five Eyes, in moves coordinated with the UK, eagerly weighed in with their condemnations of the arrest warrants. Whereas Global Affairs Canada denounced “transnational repression”, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, declared that “the extraterritorial targeting of Hong Kongers who are exercising their fundamental freedoms is a form of transnational repression”.

And after the Australian foreign minister, Penny Wong, deplored “the broad and extraterritorial application of Hong Kong’s national security legislation” (Canberra has parallel laws), her New Zealand counterpart, Winston Peters, decried the hounding of “pro-democracy activists” (an extraordinary description for plotters wanting to create turmoil in China).

If nothing else, the reactions of the Five Eyes partners strongly suggest that they consider the HKP to have some role to play in the ensuing stages of their anti-China strategies. They were concerned for their proxies, whose activities had received a significant setback. The Hong Kong authorities, therefore, correctly read the situation, and their determination to counter an existential threat to the city was laudable.

In response to the Five Eyes’ squealing, a Hong Kong SAR government spokesman pointed out, “No country will watch with folded arms on acts and activities that endanger national security”, which was incontrovertible.

Indeed, if the shoe were on the other foot, Lammy and Cooper would be justifiably incensed if China were to allow anti-British conspirators to abuse its hospitality by hatching subversive plots to destabilize the UK. 

Although, in varying degrees, the Five Eyes partners encouraged the black-clad thugs who tried to destroy the “one country, two systems” policy in 2019, the insurrection failed. They then welcomed the fleeing culprits with open arms, and everybody can now see why. They envisage a continuing role for them in destabilizing China, whether through entities like the HKP or otherwise.

At a time when Lammy’s government claims to want improved ties with China, the Five Eyes strategy is contemptible. However, the threats have been adequately assessed in Hong Kong, with the necessary countermeasures being taken. The law’s reach is long, and nobody should imagine they can endanger national security with impunity.

The Five Eyes must clearly understand that the threats to China they have countenanced will be firmly countered. Although Hong Kong is small, it knows how to defend itself from bullies and those who wish it ill. Regardless of the Five Eyes’ hypocrisy, Hong Kong’s police force will continue to resolutely protect its people and their way of life from foreign dangers.

The author is a senior counsel who previously served as the director of public prosecutions of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.