lito destroyed his record 3 times in 202250th anniversary here after the mass rioting last year. hong kong may be quieter, but it's far from being at peace. this month that the city's local government, beijing forced out for pro-democracy legislators, giving them no chance to oppose the move. further 15 resigned in protest of what they called an attempt to silence the last bit of dissent in the city. for help our chief executive gary low said hong kong now needed an assembly comprised of patriots.

hello and welcome to this special edition of conflict zone on the crisis in hong kong. over the last year, we've interviewed several probe aging and pro-democracy figures, and we challenge them all to justify what they've done and said some of their arguments have clearly failed to stand the test of time. mason law, a leading pro-democracy activist, fled to london in june after a warrant was issued for his arrest. this week i asked him if he'd ever believed his movement could take on beijing. and when i think we have already achieved a lot of things where demonstrate the courage and bravery of how calm people and making sure the well knows that well received stay and collaborate in combating the authoritarian expansion of china. so i think we have awakened the world, but the result isn't in doubt, is it, china will get its way. beijing will get its way, won't it?

well, beijing has been suppressing hong kong people at the cost of our basic freedom. and as a matter of fact, the world has been reacting to that suppression a lot of sanctioning zan embargo was. and also, plenty of countries abandoning and extradition treaty to hong kong is shows that the world actually know what china has been doing and determined to counter at last year's the rioting intensified. beijing warned protesters to expect what it called a blow from the sword of law. victor gao, the chinese lawyer and academic tried to suggest that his government had nothing against democratic rights. it was just against violence. so long as democracy democratic rights are exercised, the peacefully and lawfully. everyone is a winner. no one is a loser. what we need to the pope's in hong kong is violence. that is the key. you

ignore the fact that china's plan has been to chip away at hong kong's freedoms and democracy until they were all meaningless. and then beijing, good reassert full control in that that's been the plan, hasn't it? well or not? again, with due respect, i disagree. why should beijing of the central government in hong kong take away any, liberties or freedoms in hong kong or the deal? they did. mr. y., like the kidnapping of 5 homegrown booksellers, is that and to turn up in maryland, china, the crackdown on those who led the 2014 process. the highly controversial decision to allow mainland chinese police to operate in the west column station. all this is chipping away at the freedoms of hong kong to beijing. imagine that people wouldn't notice this. i think we need to really keep an eye on the big picture that is ever since the 1997 hong kong has managed to keep its relative independence.

judiciary independence, for example, political system, there has been no change is set, or if you talk about specific cases, we can go into details if you have more time. now remember when 10 shopping were still alive and he was the key architect for the one country 2 system. he said, for the record that if the one country 2, a system will work out for the 1st 50 years, why couldn't it be extended for another 50 years? so there is an uncertainty as to what will happen in hong kong after 2047. i would say everything will come to their end if, for example, violence continues in hong kong. however, if stability, prosperity, development, and the improvement of the people's living standards are the normal things all the way leading up to 247. why couldn't the one country 2 system apply more years ago is give me you have to tell me to measure one point, you know, put in the overall magnitude scale of china or whatever bad things that have

happened in the home of the past 6 months. things in china is, is, is at the best can be called a storm in a teacup. it's not going to change meaningfully. anything that's happening in people's republic of china had law. what beijing is unhappy about and adamantly is a pollster to is the violence in hong kong. let's be honest, as straightforward with them. no country either britain of the united states will tolerate the level of violence that has engulfed hong kong for the past 6 months. and that kind of warning fell on deaf ears on the streets of hong kong. with demonstrators were in no mood to step back. besides, by using violence themselves, they will have the attention of western governments. i put it to joey pro-democracy student that the protesters went so far as to kill anyone movement.

yes, i agree. and i am prepared to take that risk and you won't come out in public and say, we need to stop this. the british government has slammed last week, slammed what it called the hard core minority said the violence was unacceptable. this is the sound of your international support. wavering and believing you isn't it? yes. well, i believe the escalation of thousands and might, but definitely be very concerning to the international society. when all the free world countries are advocating using peaceful means to bring the situation to a resort. but they tell you that going too far already does not matter. well, of course that matters, but i think the most important thing is about how can we hold our government accountable, and how can we bring them to respond to our, to what about the judiciary. you've heard criticism from judicial institutions in

hong kong, pretty heavy criticism. these are the bodies, enjoy considerable respect around the world for the impartiality. again, if you are losing them. this is a really bad sign for the law society, for instance, of all forms of honor for violence, particularly against the police, the use of petrol bombs against the police, as well as the apparent attacks on the families of police officers. of the children at school. who proof of those methods, bullying the children of police officers that school? well, i don't agree with those math that's still with us. and so you don't agree with the violence and you don't agree with the bullying of the children. doesn't sound as though there's much you agree with, but you'll stay silent anyway. now we had the f, a k thing using piece. i mean, for example, like peaceful rallies, marches to,

to express our councils and demands. and, but the point is that we do not publicly condemn those actions, but still we try to use our peaceful means to use our own case for me is to try to switch the tactic of those using intimidation, mafia, style and intimidation. we have a report of one teenage daughter of an officer been harassed by another out. while she was playing sport, they said, what your father is doing is disgusting since when have children responsible for the actions of their parents? well, 1st off, i don't thing. any family members of those police officers should be responsible for their own disgusting actions, and i'm able to, you're making them responsible. some of your people are making responsible believe in them. harrison. what i believe that is happening. but after or when the law society says it's happening, yes, i can deny that it is actually happening. but still we're trying to use play so tactics to, to bring the situation to

a resolution. and i believe like bullying family members would not be a very good way to solve this situation. the hong kong bar association. so do the hong kong airport constituted serious struction and was in open defiance of junctions granted by the courts. in other words, you broke the law. do you want to live in a state governed by the rule of law or only the news that you like? of course i would like to live in a state of floor. however, we can see that it is very obvious that the situation of where our flying home town is being broken, not by the protesters, but by the government itself fast. and i believe that's why protesters are marching on the street are taking onto the streets, even though they know that it will break the law. and i believe, you know, that the most important is to fight to protect the rule of law in hong kong and judicial independence. but you're trashing it at the same time. well,

i believe breaking the law to protect to them or doesn't. because well, it is the government that forces us to take on the streets and to break the laws, it is not a protest loudly. so this is, you know, very forces you to break the law or do that the government far as i set it up to me . that's your interpretation. but here, here are these judicial institutions rule warning, you that criminal contempt as they put it impedes the administration of justice. and if unchecked, will inflict grave and represent damage to the rule of law in hong kong, grave and irreparable damage. that's what we think you are doing to. hong kong doesn't a matter of cost that matters. but as i have mentioned, what matters the most about whether we can actually bring a change to our political structure and government structure. and that would be the common goal. and would be the most important go for us to achieve for this moment.

and i believe, even for the department of justice's self as in being totally independent for now, after, after the hangover of hong kong from the british government to the chinese government, we can see that our core values are traditional where system is being encroached by the chinese government for a while, the protest brought results. the hong kong government scrapped a controversial extradition bill. it would have seen suspects tried in mainland courts controlled by the communist party. the police arrested hundreds of protesters in the pro-democracy movement. have plenty of other demands. foreign governments want them to open a dialogue with the government, but there was little appetite for them. if you have a son down with the government and hold a dialogue who would hold the talks? who could, who could also rise compromises that are essential in any kind of political dialogue. who in your movement could actually sit down and authorize compromises?

i believe nobody could represent our movement because as you know, leave the letters. nobody will sit down with you. you're not opening doors, you're closing doors. when we are going darshan, you just said nobody could authorize compromises really consider a room for you. represent you while back you have not supposed to talk to. well, back in june, the chief executive kerry has tried to approach to several state in your there's a hong kong and we had rejected her offer because she requested a private meeting with only some of this didn't you know, hong kong which, which is not even representing all the students in hong kong, it would be a start, wouldn't that it would have been a start. it won't be a start, it will only be a end to our movement. because back in 2014, we see that caroline tried to talk to some of the student leaders, some of the leaders of the umbrella revolution. however, what we got our dirty after the dialogue was that was to crackdown after our movement and then current enough to fear any of her any of her promises in the

dialogue. and we felt like, especially in this leaderless movement, it's very important for us to have a public dialogue with as many stakeholders in a society as possible. at least we cannot only have the student activists talking to kerry land. ok, we have to think that other stakeholders you've put forward 5 principle demands of the hong kong government. you and your fellow activists, that the government has only addressed one of them, which was the extradition bill, which they withdrew from. but in fact, according to our bit chairman, professor of, nor the 1st day of hong kong, the government responded to all of your demands, just not in the way that you want it. you wanted an independent investigation into police handling of the riots. you didn't get that, but you didn't get nothing out of the independent police complaints. council appointed 5 overseas experts from britain, canada, australia, and new zealand. you can get everything but they did respond. well,

i believe what are we calling for is not only a official demand for official response from kerry lam. what we are asking for is about a concrete actions by to hong kong government. we're asking them to respond to our demands by taking actual actions. by june, this year, beijing's patience would run out. it published the draft of a new law that opened the way for its feared security agencies. so operated will in hong kong, regina, a member of the city government and chair of the new beijing people's party tried to play it all down. i don't think they're talking about direct and forstmann of law enforcement of laws will continue to be the responsibility of our policeman. that's not what it's so it is against the basic law. no, no, no. that's what you described. they did not say watch it. this. what they only said that some national security agency made me set up on the need basis as an mocambo macao as a national security council. yeah. well what was, i'm an ashram are selling a house. that means doesn't mean the baby creatively waves. actually,

we don't know for that tito's so you can't be late, culpable as well. you should not. you can't give any comforting, but as you are not about this. and you cannot give any unwarranted accusations. if there are no facts, you are making unwarranted accusations. will these agencies operate under a mainland law or hong kong law? you don't know, do you? no, no, no. it's in the basic law. they must obey hong kong law. when i said this, it is not clear yet what any new national security agency would be responsible for . it could simply be responsible for public education publicized here and promotion . you know, you cannot come to the conclusion that they are, they will be enforcing hong kong law. that's what they brit, that's what they do when they bring in the national security organs of the central police. government is a central people's government. that's what they are looking for. education is it,

you don't know that again, you aren't, you, and you have no, no factual basis for making those sort of statements you are simply making are sweeping allegations based on your own assumptions and bias when there's no assumptions and bias. when you look at how the national security organs of the central people's government operate when they're in on the mainland, and we're not talking about mainland, we're talking about one country 2 systems. let's come back to hong kong. it doesn't look as though it's one country 2 systems that have running in the national security organs have and imposing their security laws on hong kong. it doesn't look like 2 systems. it looks like one country, one system. if you do that, they are and acting. they are trying to enact a hong kong specific version which is consistent with our common law systems. if they just wish to impose a mansion imposed china's system on us, they could just apply this to us. china's national security law,

but they are not doing this. they are now consulting hong kong experts about and in crafting a hong kong specific version for us to take account of our separate systems. those comforting predictions turned out to be wide of the mark when beijing security law was published. it was all that the pro-democracy movement had feared, and more cold cases could now be handed over to the mainland for investigation judgement and punishment trials could be held in secret. and though the new security agencies were not required to follow hong kong law to be fair, regina had hadn't seen the full text when we spoke. but she firmly rejected the suggestion that the law reflected beijing's paranoia about free speech and freedom in general. but that's a very unfair statement. in the past 12 months, the police have uncovered at least 22 cases of extremely dangerous keying. p.-p.

explosive hole that inch in one in the school. and lots of weaponry, dangerous weapons have been using a lot of so-called peaceful protests. you know, and innocent people have been killed. these are volunteer events have never occurred in hong kong. and there are people waving, promoting hong kong independence, you know, waving hong kong flacks or chanting revolutionary songs. you know, these are activities that no government would allow. a lot of hong kong people are very angry about it. john fund revolutionary songs, never an order of trying to get illusion results. that little profit. everyone started to chant revolutionary songs in free countries. regina europe, you can go to london or washington and chant, whatever revolutionary songs you want. why don't you try it? it depends on whether the songs are chanted as in an opera, livesay rappler or chanted as a part up,

a well organized and well planned action plan. to stoke separatist sentiments at the end of the day, your, your reason your pitch to the people of hong kong is trust beijing. this security law will not be used in the same way that beijing uses security laws to tamp down on freedoms on the mainland. this is what you are asking them to accept that china is not going to behave the way it behaves on the mainland in hong kong. do you really believe that? of course, trust our motherland. our motherland has nothing but good intentions for the people gone can and also trust the basic law. trust one country 2 systems which has worked well in the past 23 years. you know, why doesn't it have better tensions to boards, its own people on the mainland? why is it torturing them in prisons and locking up a 1000000 wigan's in so-called reeducation camps? why is it doing that?

i must ask you to. i must ask you not to confuse and fills the issues, but keep talking about make an allegation about a name that would have nothing to do it one country 2 systems. i ask you to come back to the situation in hong kong, how one country 2 systems really operate and don't allow your bias to color your, you know, your reports on the hong kong. that's totally unfair to hong kong people. i take strong objection to that. whatever the objections, the chinese president xi jinping has moved to cement his hold of the holocaust and his record on the mainland speaks for itself the most serious crackdown on human rights there for 25 years. but does beijing really mean the people of hong kong give up their rights and embrace the restrictions, censorship, and political dictatorship of the chinese communist party. victor gao again. let's

be honest about it. china is in firm control of the situation in hong kong. as far as sovereignty is concerned, no one in the world can really 2nd this 2nd, guess this point or really take hong kong away from china. that's for the record. let's not 2nd guess about that. of course on the one country 2 system. hong kong peeps its political system in hong kong, the capital is the system. but do you think anyone will realistically expect the hong kong can be misused as a strong hold against china? no, i the answering or even today, i know all the way to try to do 47 could go unanswered. the question was, which is where the beijing imagines hong kong would except the kind of restrictions that poses on its own people on the mainland. after 2047, china has full discretion to decide what kind of political system will prevail in hong kong, much more known one people of hong kong get in return for being subsumed into

children or a chance to be spied on by what human rights watch. one of the world's most intrusive mass surveillance systems, whatever happens will happen in hong kong after 2047, their finest records of arbitrary detention torture and violations of right trial. you really think the people of hong kong are 2nd class. i need some of that in my life. not really looking forward to that, i think in today's world that we should be very objective and non-biased about china. let's now look at how china is developing. let's look at china lifting hundreds or millions of people out of poverty. let's look at how hong kong has benefited tremendously over the past 22 years after being part of the one country 2 systems. and they said no, is there no way for the pro-democracy movement to negotiate now with the hong kong government, who has a door closed for good. i think if we look at asco,

relating aggressive behavior from the central government, that is qualification of the legislators, the sweeping national, a national security law and order arrest they have made. there are no cites of them reeling to concede any grounds. they have been doing a lot of brutal suppression, hong kong, so i don't think that is a room for negotiation rather actually room for the international committee to act, to really hold china accountable. what's actually left for the pro-democracy movement on the ground, symbolic protest, lack of cooperation, civil disobedience. what form is the protest going to take? now that china has narrowed your scope for movement. social movement is enough of a pendulum or we have our highest point last year, where going rather to a low point. now i think for us, for hong kong,

people would definitely have to defend our professional values in the satellite education university or in a legal status that we have to defend our own grounds. that actually a lot of invisible battles ongoing. and the purpose of that is to preserve our freedom values. what we have had you fled to london. now you here in exile effectively. do you still fear china's reach? are you afraid being here in london? we have a lot of attacks to excel at 1st from authoritarian countries like russia, like china. i dare not to say that i'm completely safe, even though i'm in london. but it doesn't stop me to voice up for complete will. i'll continue to play my war into international advocate for hong kong,

democratic movement, and the international community to hold china accountable to address the human violations, human rights violations in any hong kong. do you think you'll ever go back to hong kong? i'm an actor 1st, i'm not entitled to lose hope. so i am hopeful that i can return to hong kong. but in that case, telling our world see the democracy and freedom in hong kong. but it takes a long while. you really believe that? i do. i think many individuals not only in hong kong, but in china they, they also have to have hope. and it takes a lot of efforts or maybe sacrifices from our generation or maybe future generations to achieve that. but i think the fate of people will never die and will never give up.

it was the 1st international tribunal in history. the number of trials 75 years ago, a high ranking officers of the nazi regime were indicted by the allied forces. they were the 1st war criminals to be held accountable for their crimes. our 2 part series, the 3rd reich in the talk. in 15 minutes on t.w.

. they're constantly growing. living costs are rising, they're becoming more densely populated. and now cities are pulsing to the beat of corona. they've become breeding grounds for the virus. isn't the end of the road, or a new beginning. city planning in the flux made in germany. yet 90 minutes on w. w's crime fighters are back at the capital africa's most successful radio drama series continues in the all of us odes are available online course. you can share and discuss on g.w. africa's facebook page and other social media platforms to crime fighters, to me. and now give us your country the will make you

rich people oil will provide you with jobs. the oil will take good care of the place. he tends to be placed over too cold on the west coast to come out in 2000. so the best place to put 2 years later, reality looks very different litters. the choose a good drinking water shortage. play good as a day. that is, if people really do that, at least if you're gonna stream of water cold, boil thomas, it's starts december 4th leg

to play this is d, w. news. a live from berlin, here in the german capital backlash over government efforts to curb the spread of the coronavirus police use water cannons to push back thousands of demonstrators protesting against a new law that extends government powers to impose restrictions. also coming up on the show with corona virus cases rising, new york city closes all of its public schools. this as u.s. attacks from close at 19 has now topped up to quarter 1000000.