The Standing Committee of National People's Congress (NPC) yesterday endorsed an interpretation of Article 104 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China, which makes specific stipulations on oath-takings by public officers and, at the same time, specifies more clearly and definitely the Central Government's stance in curbing "independence for Hog Kong"unequivocally and resolutely.

　　The content of the interpretation provides guide lines of fundamental significance for the SAR’s political ecology,social stability and criteria of right and wrong in future. What is meant to safeguard"one country two systems"? What is called doing harm to national interests?　　What is law-breaking under"one country two systems", and what is law-abiding?What can be done and what must not be pursued? The interpretation this time gives unprecedentedly clear-cut explanations.

　　With this interpretation of the Basic Law and its implementation,"one country two systems"and the Basic Law will be better put into practice, the SAR Government will be able to more effectively govern in accordance with the law, and pro-establishment people will be able to more confidently and righteously show their love of nation and Hong Kong and reconstruct the SAR, while all words and deeds attempting to jeopardise"one country two systems", do harm to national interests and deny the Central Government's constitutional status will increasingly find themselves in a blind alley.The "fond dream" of certain individuals to sneak into the SAR's governance structure to spread"independence for Hong Kong" is also bound to be completely dashed.

　　Therefore, either those standing on the high ground of caring about "one country two systems"and the SAR's future development or practitioners in various sectors and vast majority of citizens in general,all must give keen attention to this interpretation of the Basic Law by the NPC Standing Committee, including its concrete content and its deep implications. The future Hong Kong SAR will not be dictated by the anti-China and trouble-making opposition let alone Sixtus Leung Chung-hang and Yau Wai-ching. It is "one country two systems", the Basic Law and nation- and Hong Kong-loving forces that decide Hong Kong's future and fate.

　　 Hong Kong has returned to China for nearly two decades, so all erroneous words and deeds wantonly ignoring the Central Government and violating "one country two systems"and the Basic Law must no longer be allowed to recklessly run wild.From now on, words and deeds such as the law-breaking Occupy Central, Mong Kok Riot and the Leung-Yau pair's evil "Shina"oath taking and spreading"independence for Hong Kong will be forcefully curbed and given due punishments.　　Resisting China and making trouble in Hong Kong will have to pay a price, and law-breaking violence will no longer be able to get off scot-free.

　　The fundamental significance of this interpretation of the Basic Law by the NPC Standing Committee lies in the following two aspects: one is that it specifically interpret Article 104 of the Basic, i.e. the stipulation on oath-taking by public officers; the second is that it unambiguously delivers an important message of the Central Government to crack down on "independence for Hong Kong".

　　First of all,on the oath-taking issue, the interpretation clarifies the following points:

　　Firstly, what is stipulated in Article 104 of the Basic Law, "to uphold the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China and to bear allegiance to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China",is not only the legal content of the Oath to be taken by public officers, but also the legal requirements and preconditions for standing for election in respect of or taking up the public office specified in the Article.

　　Secondly, no public office shall be assumed, no corresponding powers or functions shall be exercised, and no corresponding entitlement shall be enjoyed by anyone who fails to lawfully and validly take the oath or who declines to take the oath; and oath-retaking is not allowed.

　　Thirdly, an oath taker who, after taking the oath, engages in conduct in breach of the oath,shall bear legal responsibility in accordance with law.

　　These three stipulations leave no room for controversy in future over oath-taking by public officers, and no loophole for anti-China trouble-makers to exploit.

　　08 November 2016