Q: The UK's most senior judge warned that the British judges would quit their role in Hong Kong if the national security law threatened the independence of the courts. What is your position on this?

A: The judiciary and the Department of Justice of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region have responded to this.

The national security law for Hong Kong is aimed to plug loopholes in the HKSAR national security legislation and establish and improve the legal system and enforcement mechanisms for safeguarding national security in the HKSAR. The independent judicial power including that of final adjudication enjoyed by the HKSAR under the Basic Law will not be affected.

We are firm in our resolve to fully and faithfully implement the "one country, two systems" and act in strict accordance with the Constitution and the Basic Law, to advance the full and effective implementation of the national security law for Hong Kong, and oppose foreign interference in Hong Kong affairs.

Q: Do the Central People's Government and the HKSAR government intend to use Article 38 of the national security law to prosecute residents of other countries for activities taking place in other countries that affect China's national security? If so, how does it differ from the US long-arm jurisdiction that the Foreign Ministry criticized?

A: Article 38 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region stipulates the principle of protective jurisdiction, which is necessary for effectively cracking down on crimes that endanger national security and safeguarding China's national security and the security of the HKSAR. This is also a common practice of many countries, including the US. It has fundamental difference from the US long-arm jurisdiction which oppresses foreign entities and individuals without cause.

Q: The British Government went ahead with the suspension of the extradition treaty between the UK and Hong Kong and introduced a ban on arms sales. What is your response on that? There has been suggestion that by doing that, Britain has breached international law. Can you explain how they've done that?

A: The UK's erroneous remarks and moves on Hong Kong are a serious breach of international law and basic norms governing international relations and gross violation of China's internal affairs. We firmly oppose them and reserve the right to react further.

Hong Kong affairs are China's internal affairs that allow no foreign interference. The Chinese government is determined to defend national sovereignty, security and development interests, to implement "one country, two systems" comprehensively and faithfully, and to oppose foreign interference in Hong Kong affairs. Intervening and pressuring tactics will never work on China. We urge the UK to wake up from its colonial dream, correct its mistake immediately and stop interfering in China's internal affairs to avoid further damage to China-UK relations.

Q: A follow-up on the UK decision regarding the Hong Kong extradition, you said that it is a breach of international law. China's Ambassador to the UK also said that regarding the decision. Could you tell us which law China believes that the UK is in breach of?

A: I already took the same question. I would like to reiterate that we oppose the UK's interference in Hong Kong affairs and China's other internal affairs, which is in breach of international law and basic norms governing international relations.

Q: I think you mentioned earlier that following Britain's decision regarding the extradition, China reserves the right to respond. Does that mean that there won't necessarily be a response? Or will there definitely be some sort of retaliation from the Chinese side? How should we describe it?

A: China will fight back against the erroneous moves by the British side.