Ronny TONG Ka Wah: The crime of collusion with foreign or foreign forces under Hong Kong’s national security law only applies to five specific acts against the national or SAR government; but the crime of foreign intervention under the UK’s national security law is stunningly widespread. Any person who, within or outside the UK, interfered with the rights of any person (not needing to be a British citizen or resident) or performed or participated in any public office or political activity subject to “foreign condition” within or outside the UK The definition of “foreign condition” is very broad and includes any foreign government or party involved in the work of the government (foreign power), any person who has direct or indirect ties with a foreign power, anyone who seeks to benefit a foreign power, etc. Even more outrageous is that the prosecution only needs to point out that foreign powers are involved in the prosecution, not to disclose what foreign powers are. A country with such vague national security laws of its own should think that it has the ability to criticize Hong Kong’s national security laws! In this case, the accused is an economic and trade office officer, and definitely fits the definition of a foreign power; as long as the prosecution can successfully prove that the accused has the right to interfere with anyone (including those wanted by the SAR), without having to prove that any national security or national interests have been damaged, you say terror is not scary! 湯家驊: 香港國安法下之勾結外國或境外勢力罪只適用五種計對國家或特區政府之特定行為；但英國國安法下之境外干預罪卻廣闊得令人咋舌。任何人在英國境內或境外附合「外國條件」下干預任何人(留意不需要是英國公民或居民)之權利，或履行或參與任何公職或政治活動即屬犯罪。「外國條件」定義非常廣闊，包括任何外國政府或有參與政府工作之政黨(外國勢力)的顧員或代理人、任何與外國勢力有直接或間接聯繫的人、任何意圖令外國勢力得益之人等。更離譜的是控方在檢控中只需指出涉及外國勢力而不需要披露外國勢力為何。一個自己有如此模糊不清的國安法之國家竟然認為有資批評香港國安法實在是匪夷所思！在這宗案中，被告乃經貿辦顧員，肯定附合外國勢力之定義；只要控方能成功證明被告行為有干預任何人(包括被特區通緝人士)之權利，而不需要證明任何國家安全或國家利益受損，即可罪成，你說恐怖不恐怖!