All trials can be held in secret. If necessary, juries can be replaced by three judges, and for this purpose the mention of a jury in any legal document of the SAR will be understood as encompassing that of a judge! These judges may be dismissed during their term of office if any of their statements contradict the Basic Law. The joint scope of action of the SAR Security Council and the National Security Commission attached to the Central Government includes foreign organizations, NGOs and news agencies in Hong Kong. Prosecution, trials and proceedings, execution of sentences for crimes under the NSL will be conducted by the Central Government’s Supreme People's Procuratorate (最高人民檢察院) and according to the PRC Criminal Procedure Law in three cases: if foreign influence is established, if an impediment to the SAR's jurisdiction is found, or if it poses a serious threat to national security. A key official from China’s Liaison Office has already clarified the trials may take place inside mainland China.
The aforementioned rules apply to four crimes, broadly defined and punishable by life imprisonment: glorifying secession about "any part of the PRC’s territory" (and thus also of Taiwan); subversion of state authority, including "obstructing" the authority of the state and the SAR government, who are mentioned separately; terrorism, including destruction of vehicles or serious interference with a public service; and lastly, collusion with foreign forces, including in the application of sanctions or blockades against China, or obstructing the drafting and implementation of laws
This is only a brief summary of a text which is characterized by a great deal of ambiguity, leaving the door open to interpretation. But it is in line with other extremist laws and regulations adopted by the central government in recent years. For example, threatening foreign companies that apply foreign governments’ sanctions against China is an integral component of China's legal arsenal. Yet, it was hard to foresee that the CCP and Xi Jinping would go this far and to such length: the text enacts full legal insecurity in Hong Kong, and a state of exception for Chinese Security’s activities. Additionally, it reverses the presumption of extraterritoriality on which Hong Kong has based its existence until now. Henceforth, this law can be applied to a non-citizen and non-resident, for any offence against the law committed abroad.
Special attention should be paid to the issue of economic news and analysis. Their release is now tightly controlled on the mainland. In the new NSL, neither "state secrets" or "business secrets" (or, as a matter of fact, "national security") are defined in any way. The law could very easily be applied to several economic issues: negative figures regarding the economy, unfavorable disclosure on companies, issues regarding corrupt business practice. In addition, will banks be held responsible for accounts and money transiting to and from individuals or organizations charged with one of the four listed crimes?
Given the radical nature of this law, the EU’s (including France) reactions thus far appear to be meek. Calling for the guarantee of individual rights and the respect of the Basic Law no longer makes much sense: the NSL refers to them cynically, while violating them without restraint. It is indeed the violation of the Basic Law, an international treaty concluded with the United Kingdom and filed with the UN, that must be condemned. On the other hand, the European Parliament voted by 564 votes to 32 to bring an action before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), with 64 abstentions, including that of the French far right party, Rassemblement National. This is rather more concrete than those who merely express their "concern" or their "attachment" to the "One Country, Two Systems" principle. These terms were very ambiguous from the outset, and the NSL leverages this ambiguity while effectively putting an end to the autonomy guaranteed by this principle and by the Basic Law.