Despite the attempts by some to portray it otherwise, the national security law that came into effect in the Hong Kong Special Administration Region on June 30 is not a human rights issue. It was enacted to plug the legal loopholes in the SAR so as to forestall and put an end to the four types of crimes that seriously endanger national security and punish those guilty of such crimes.

Yet despite it being clearly stipulated that the purpose of the law is to prevent, suppress and impose punishment for those offenses, those seeking to use Hong Kong as a pressure point against Beijing have continually claimed it represses the human rights of Hong Kong residents.

Even some human rights "experts" have jumped on this bandwagon of prejudice and distortion set in motion by London and Washington as part of their politically motivated pressure campaign against China.

In the latest addition to the chorus, special procedures mandate holders of the United Nations Human Rights Council, who serve in their personal capacity, published an open letter claiming that the legislation "infringes on certain fundamental rights" such as the independence of judges and lawyers and the right to freedom of expression in the SAR.

In doing so, the signatories to the letter, who should know better, have turned a cold shoulder to the violent terrorist activities of the separatists and political extremists in Hong Kong.

It is because these activities have been carried out in the name of "human rights", a deceptive banner for those pursuing a "color revolution", that some people are willing to ignore the facts and turn a blind eye to their true nature.

That the allegations against the legislation seek to politicize human rights issues as a means to smear China was highlighted by China's Permanent Mission to the United Nations Office at Geneva and other International Organizations in Switzerland, which forcefully rebutted the allegations, pointing out that the law clearly stipulates respect for and protection of the rights and freedoms, including freedom of the press, of speech, of publication, of association, of assembly and to demonstrate, which Hong Kong residents enjoy under the Basic Law.

Likewise, as the mission stated, the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as they apply to Hong Kong, are protected by the legislation.

The national security law has been a long-delayed addition to the SAR's legal framework and enforcement mechanism thanks to the antics of opposition lawmakers in the SAR. The letter merely highlights the ignorance, prejudice and double standards that are the hallmarks of the brickbats to which the law is being subjected.