This year marks the fifth anniversary of the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL). The city is stable, secure, and back in business. Yet persistent misperceptions — mostly in Western media — continue to cast a shadow. Case in point: Some foreign visitors still arrive in Hong Kong with “burner phones”, out of unfounded fear of surveillance or legal peril. These anxieties, though baseless, are telling. They reflect not the reality of the NSL, but the need to communicate its rationale convincingly.

Let’s start with a simple truth: National security laws are not unique to Hong Kong. The United States has the USA Patriot Act. The United Kingdom enforces its Official Secrets Acts. France routinely tightens oversight over extremist speech. These democracies have accepted that protecting sovereignty and social order sometimes requires curbing certain freedoms. Why, then, is our NSL deemed repressive?

Despite the restoration of stability, revival of economic activity, and the return to normal life for locals and foreign visitors alike after the implementation of the NSL, Western media keep portraying Hong Kong negatively, fueling prospective visitors’ unnecessary anxieties about the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The smears in the Western media reflect not the inadequacies of the NSL, but rather highlight the need for the SAR to more convincingly explain the rationale of the NSL to international audiences.

Hong Kong has long positioned itself as a superconnector, a vital hub facilitating economic, cultural, and political exchanges between the Chinese mainland and the rest of the world. Among Chinese cities, Hong Kong’s distinctive history, culture, and cosmopolitan outlook uniquely equip it to explain Chinese political and cultural contexts clearly and convincingly to global audiences.

This is not merely a matter of public relations or city branding. It goes to the core of Hong Kong’s success as a center for cultural exchanges. We need to explain the NSL in a way that resonates with international audiences. Achieving this requires more than slogans, bureaucratic language, or official announcements. It demands nuanced interpretation and thoughtful, persuasive communication.

Contrary to some Western media’s narrative, the NSL neither seeks ideological conformity nor forbids criticism of the government. It is clear that diverse perspectives, dissenting voices, and criticisms of the government remain as vigorous as ever in news media, social media, over yum cha tables, and in classrooms.

Yet these facts are frequently dismissed by Western media as official messaging, while their own biased misunderstandings are often uncritically accepted by global readers as facts. This is why we need to present our messages in a way that resonates internationally.

To communicate the NSL’s purpose effectively, Hong Kong must reframe its narrative. Rather than highlighting “what cannot be done”, it should clearly emphasize “what can be done freely without feeling inhibited”. A city with transparent laws, predictable judicial processes, and stable governance is inherently attractive to investors, residents, and visitors. Far from restricting freedoms, the NSL protects the daily lives of local residents and visitors alike. It does not suppress legitimate dissent. Stability, clarity, and legal protections benefit everyone.

Just as Hong Kong’s fire safety regulations are for preventing fire, not to prohibit open-flame cooking, the NSL is designed to safeguard freedoms and human rights, not to curtail them. The law ensures that both residents and visitors can safely enjoy the same high standards of openness and individual freedoms as in other advanced international cities. Nothing less. It is crucial to clearly articulate this logic when engaging with global audiences.

Indeed, advanced Western nations have comparable national security frameworks. For example, the USA Patriot Act authorizes extensive government surveillance and detention on national security grounds. Similarly, all Western democracies legitimately curtail certain liberties to safeguard national security. By respectfully highlighting such parallels, Hong Kong may not immediately persuade all its critics, but it can at least foster thoughtful reflection.

Hong Kong’s greatest asset is authenticity, not propaganda. Allowing international visitors to experience the city’s stability, openness, and freedoms firsthand proves far more effective than any public relations campaign. Promoting tourism thus generates not only economic dividends but is also the most effective way to tell our stories

Furthermore, Hong Kong must proactively explain the legal safeguards embedded within the NSL. The city continues to uphold common-law principles, transparent judicial proceedings, rigorous evidentiary standards, robust appeals processes, and even with foreign judges on our bench. Clear and sincere communication about these facts can help dispel lingering misconceptions.

Hong Kong’s greatest asset is authenticity, not propaganda. Allowing international visitors to experience the city’s stability, openness, and freedoms firsthand proves far more effective than any public relations campaign. Promoting tourism thus generates not only economic dividends but is also the most effective way to tell our stories.

Beyond tourism, Hong Kong should enhance its position as a prominent center for cultural exchange, hosting international events, artistic performances, and academic forums. It is incumbent upon us, as residents of a superconnector, to let visitors and our friends from abroad feel at ease and at home. “No need for burner phones” is a small message to put across, but it stands for a broader collective responsibility that we must embrace.