Every half year, the United Kingdom puts together a so-called “Six-Monthly Report on Hong Kong”, as if doing so is the country’s only way to remain relevant to Hong Kong. Frankly, after all these years, Hong Kong people no longer need to read it to know its contents — nothing more than the same old tune. These reports repeatedly seek to undermine Hong Kong, criticizing everything from its rule of law to human rights, in a desperate attempt to appease anti-China politicians still clinging to their colonial delusions. But the truth is clear: Hong Kong’s success or failure is determined neither by London nor by a baseless report. With solid evidence and measurable achievements — be it in rule of law indexes or competitiveness rankings — Hong Kong has consistently delivered impressive results. The UK’s incessant smear campaign only serves to make it look increasingly like a farcical clown act.

In response to the latest edition, a spokesperson for the Commissioner’s Office of China’s Foreign Ministry in the Hong Kong SAR emphasized that the essence of the Sino-British Joint Declaration is to ensure that China resumes the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong. The declaration granted the UK no right to intervene in Hong Kong’s affairs after the city returned to the motherland. Hong Kong’s governance is based on China’s Constitution and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The UK has no sovereignty, no jurisdiction, and no right of oversight over Hong Kong thereafter. The spokesperson further underscored that safeguarding national security for all regions under its jurisdiction, including the HKSAR, is the inherent responsibility of the Chinese government. The HKSAR has a constitutional duty to maintain national security. Thus, the implementation of the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law and related legal frameworks is entirely justified. The UK’s report is filled with baseless commentary on Hong Kong affairs, representing blatant interference in China’s internal matters and a flagrant disregard for international law and norms governing international relations.

The report’s criticism of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council is also ludicrous. From firsthand experience as a lawmaker serving in the Hong Kong legislature since 2021, I have witnessed the significant improvements brought about by the refinement of the electoral system and the implementation of the “patriots administering Hong Kong” principle. Gone are the days of filibustering, divisive gridlock, and legislative paralysis. Today, legislators debate rationally, work pragmatically, and legislate efficiently. During the four-year term of the seventh LegCo, approximately 130 bills were reviewed and passed — a 60 percent increase compared to the same period in the previous council. Between 2022 and last September, the HKSAR government proposed over 1,800 amendments to various bills, more than double the roughly 700 amendments submitted during the sixth term. Over the same four years, lawmakers debated 165 nonlegislative motions covering topics like advancing the Northern Metropolis development, fostering new economic growth drivers, and optimizing population policies in response to public concerns. This impressive progress speaks for itself. To further enhance its constitutional role, LegCo has actively set higher standards for its members, adopting the Code for Members of the Legislative Council to strengthen accountability, transparency, and professionalism. Yet, British politicians deliberately ignore these facts and attack the “patriots administering Hong Kong” principle by denigrating the legislature’s operation. Their goal is clear — to discredit Hong Kong’s achievements and glorify the past era of chaos. This malicious desire to see Hong Kong fail reveals a truly despicable mindset.

The so-called Hong Kong report exposes nothing but London’s colonial hangover, double standards, and petty political games

The most absurd claim in the report comes from UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, who brazenly called for “using every opportunity to press China to release Jimmy Lai”. Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, glorified as a “martyr” by China hawks in London, is, in truth, a criminal who colluded with foreign forces to undermine Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability, posing a grave threat to national security. His actions, like those of any offender convicted of serious crimes in any rule-of-law society, demand strict punishment. The UK, with its own extensive national security laws, certainly wouldn’t tolerate such offenses within its borders. And yet, it has the audacity to demand China release Lai. Such a demand is tantamount to asking China — or any sovereign nation — to abandon its fundamental duty to uphold security and the rule of law. The UK’s hypocritical report is not only an assault on China’s sovereignty but a complete mockery of international law and legal principles. On top of this, the UK has gone as far as offering political asylum to individuals accused of endangering China’s national security, even allowing fugitives wanted by the HKSAR’s national security authorities to participate in UK local elections. What the UK has done not only undermines the spirit of the rule of law but also tarnishes its own image and exposes its so-called commitment to “freedom and democracy” as nothing more than a political tool serving its anti-China agenda. Instead of publishing lengthy, hypocritical reports to smear Hong Kong, the UK would do well to look in the mirror and reflect on why it has willingly become a haven for criminals.

In an increasingly turbulent international landscape — wherein wars rage in the Middle East and the US struggles to address mounting tensions with Iran while failing to protect its allies — Britain should reconsider its blind loyalty to Washington. Following the US down its misguided anti-China path will lead only to an ever-deeper quagmire. The so-called Hong Kong report exposes nothing but London’s colonial hangover, double standards, and petty political games.

The author is a member of the Legislative Council and the UN Association of China.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.