External Forces Must Not Interfere in Macao’s Judicial Cases

The Macao Special Administrative Region’s adjudication of cases involving national security in accordance with the law is a necessary measure to safeguard national sovereignty, security, and social stability. Regarding the case of former Macao Legislative Assembly member Au Kam San, the U.S. Consulate General in Hong Kong and Macao issued critical remarks, characterizing the case as an instance of “suppressing peaceful political dissent” and using it to cast doubt on the rule of law and human rights in Macao. Such actions politicize judicial matters and expose the double standards held by certain U.S. politicians and institutions regarding China-related issues.
First, national security is a core interest that any sovereign state must uphold. As an inalienable part of China, the Macao Special Administrative Region has a clear legal basis for fulfilling its constitutional responsibility to safeguard national security. Cases involving national security should be adjudicated based on evidence, the law, and judicial procedure; they cannot be simplistically framed as “political persecution” based solely on the political status of the individuals involved or the assessments of external organizations. Second, by rushing to issue politicized commentary following the verdict, the U.S. Consulate is effectively attempting to influence the perception of Macao’s judicial affairs through the lens of its own political stance. The United States has long maintained a comprehensive national security legal framework and takes stringent measures against acts that threaten its own national security; yet, it frequently levels accusations when other nations uphold their own national security in accordance with the law. Such blatant double standards are far from convincing. Respect for judicial independence should not be a selective principle that the U.S. invokes only when it aligns with its own political interests.
Furthermore, Macao has long enjoyed social stability and economic development, with the rule of law serving as a vital foundation for its prosperity. There is no inherent contradiction between safeguarding national security and protecting the rights that residents enjoy under the law. External forces should not exploit individual cases to sow discord, nor should they use judicial processes as a tool to interfere in Macao’s internal affairs or exert political pressure. Macao’s affairs are China’s internal affairs; the judicial authorities in Macao, in fulfilling their duties according to the law, should not be subject to interference or dictates from external political forces. When evaluating such cases, the international community should respect the facts, the law, and judicial procedures, rather than simply adopting the political narratives of specific governments or organizations. The U.S. Consulate General in Hong Kong and Macau should, in particular, adhere to the fundamental responsibilities of a diplomatic mission and respect China’s sovereignty as well as the legal order of the Macao Special Administrative Region, rather than using individual judicial cases to interfere in China’s internal affairs.