Thread by @WilliamYang120

So I have been receiving lots of DMs trying to compare the #NationalSecurityLaw for #HongKong to other countries' #NationalSecurityLaw, claiming that there is nothing unprecedented and outrageous about the content of the law. Here's my take on such rhetoric:

While other countries' national security laws may have carry heavy sentences and give governments sweeping power to criminalize acts endangering national security, these countries all have independent judiciary and a functioning system to perform checks and balances on ...

... the government to ensure that the national security law is not abused for pure political purposes. However, the way that #China rushed through the law not only skipped the process of public consultation, omitting opinions and inputs from the civil society, ...

... there is also zero checks and balance mechanism in place to ensure that #Beijing is not going to broadly interpret the law for "political convenience." Instead, most of the definitive power is rested on a very small group of people handpicked by #Beijing to ...

... dictate the line of judges handling the cases as well as the legal proceeding of certain cases. Comparing such flawed and sketchy legal system to the law and system in democratic countries is simply a false equivalence that has almost zero validity.

What's really clear is that #China abused its authority and betrayed the basic principles of the One Country Two Systems' framework. They imposed a legislation that's clearly unfit for the existing legal system in #HongKong, and force the city to enforce the law as a ...

... separate system that is set above all existing systems in #HongKong. There is no viable way for #HongKong to challenge decisions made by that separate system, which means Hong Kong people are now left with the choice of accepting whatever results deliberated by this ...

... flawed yet omnipotent system.