The first national security case in Macau is closed to the court: the family is still waiting for a public trial for one year after the arrest of the district Jin-sung.

One year after his arrest, the family still does not know when and to what extent he will be tried in public. Former member of the Legislative Assembly of Macao, Zhongseng, was the first person arrested in the city under the National Security Act.Associated Press's tracking on July 30th.He was accused of providing false information to overseas “anti-China organizations” and inciting hatred against the central and Macao authorities, but most of the material in the case was not made available to the public.

Secrets first appeared on the choice of lawyers. Reports indicate that the National Security Council has been able to restrict access to lawyers for defendants;If found to be a threat to national security,It can also be closed. These are not procedural details for an accused who may face a prolonged period of imprisonment, but are the core conditions for determining the independence of the defence and the admissibility of evidence for public scrutiny.

The District Kingsin has long been concerned with the housing, labour and electoral system of Macao and has served as a primary school teacher and directly elected member of Parliament. His political activities were far less extensive than the Hong Kong Democratic Movement, and Macao had not experienced the same level of protests in

1. This is why the first national security law case is more like a line: it tells society that even when opposition forces are limited, criticism of central and overseas organizations may be included in national security criminal proceedings.

The Macao Government would like to emphasize that national security cases are also considered in accordance with the law and that the accused enjoy legal rights. But when key decisions are taken by the executive State security agencies and complete evidence is not available to the public, “in accordance with the law” alone is not sufficient to answer the question of impartiality. Legal proceedings require not only judges and judgements, but also a society that is allowed to understand what the prosecution has proved and what the defence can refute.

Similar changes have been demonstrated in the national security trials in Hong Kong over the past few years: specific judges, strict bail, long remands and the criminalization of overseas contacts. The Macao case cannot be simply reproduced as a Hong Kong version, but it is clearly under the same logic of sovereign security — whether political expression is tolerated, and is no longer determined primarily by whether the act has caused concrete harm, but increasingly depends on whether it challenges the integrity of the central boundaries.

The District Jinxin is still the accused and not the convicted offender. The charges against him need to be proven in court; The test of the Macao judicial system begins with the court ' s willingness to show the certification process to the public.