Hong Kong's summer of unrest has gone into a downward spiral, bringing with it escalating violence and widespread vandalism, which is pushing the Asian trading and financial hub to the brink of a recession.

On October 4, China's Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) government established an anti-mask law in the latest drive to quell the months-long riot.

Chief Executive Carrie Lam has invoked the power under the Emergency Regulations Ordinance and passed the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation to "create a deterrent effect against masked, violent protesters and rioters," which came into force the next day.

"It's not an easy decision to ban masks, but a necessary one. It's not to say Hong Kong is in a state of emergency," Lam said at a press conference.

Entitled the "anti-mask law,” Secretary for Security John Lee explained that the new rule forbids protesters at public assemblies, authorized or not, to conceal their identity with masks and related articles. Any offender could face up to one year in jail or a fine of 25,000 Hong Kong dollars (nearly 3,200 U.S. dollars). It has set exemptions for people who have to wear a mask for special needs, including for medical, health and religious reasons, according to the government gazette.

Since June, a large group of radical protesters often black-clad and masked, set fires on streets, crippled public facilities including metro stations, assaulted police and beat up innocent civilians who held different political views, which have posed serious threats to the cornerstone of the rule of law and economy in the city.

Even before the law came into effect at midnight, radical protesters, apparently irritated by the new legal tool aiming to curb their violence, started trashing MTR stations and public and private properties across the city, and even viciously attacking passersby just as they spoke Chinese Mandarin. Their acts have already turned into crimes no matter in which country or under which judiciary system.

Ban on face-coverings: reasonable, lawful and necessary

The move that added Hong Kong to the list of countries and regions implementing such a law, including Britain, France, Canada and many states in the United States, was widely welcomed by Hong Kongers and gained support from Beijing.

Yang Guang, spokesperson for the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, said it was necessary for combating and ending violent criminal acts and restoring social order after Lam's announcement of invoking emergency law. Besides, many of Hong Kong's social and political groups, chambers of commerce, as well as prominent law experts also voiced support for the newly-enacted regulation.

After the launch, 40 members of the Legislative Council issued a joint statement which believed that this initiative will help police with law enforcement to better end violence and chaos. Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), a political group in Hong Kong, also said that this is a difficult but absolutely necessary decision. Meanwhile, an online petition supporting the ban has also been signed by more than 40,000 netizens within a few hours since it was declared. 

Hong Kong Education Bureau also sent a letter to the principals of all schools and colleges and demanded them to remind students not to wear masks in or outside the campus.

However, some opposition elements and radicals maliciously disseminated rumors claiming that the new regulation deliberately circumvented LegCo and violated the Basic Law of Hong Kong. They even made up alarming stories that the government could make use of it to confiscate people’s private property, even ban them on the internet and streets.

Facing debates and misunderstandings, Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng clarified that there is no issue of the LegCo being circumvented regarding the new law and assured the public that it will not infringe on freedom of expression and peaceful assembly on the premise of no masks.

"The new regulation, which is a piece of subsidiary legislation, is made pursuant to the Emergency Regulations Ordinance and has to be laid on the table of the LegCo which may by resolution amend the regulation," she said.

"Interference with a person's rights is minimal and in any event proportionate to the legitimate aim of protecting public safety and public order."

Kennedy Wong, a prominent lawyer and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Hong Kong told the Global Times, an English-language Chinese newspaper, that the Emergency Regulations Ordinance confers on the chief executive in consultation with the executive council to make regulations which is necessary when Hong Kong's public security or public order is endangered without going through LegCo under the Hong Kong judiciary framework.

Ronny Tong Ka-wah, Hong Kong Senior Counsel, also pointed out that newly-enacted law would necessarily need to surpass legislature, and also in emergency, "We do not necessarily need normal legislature procedure, considering LegCo is now halting the meetings due to escalating violence, so we can't let the chaos drift waiting until LegCo back on track."

"In terms of law enforcement, the law will be implemented to protect the group's interests, but not individual interests. But we cannot stop making new rules because of challenges," Tong said.

Hong Kong LegCo Complex was severely smeared by the black-clad mobs on July 1. The rioters smashed the windows and stormed in, occupying and vandalizing the LegCo chamber.

Elsie Leung, former deputy director of the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee, gave a positive reply as well about whether this law will ease the situation as expected during the interview with CGTN. 

"The legislation would be effective in helping the police to identify the culprits because at the moment if they are covering their faces, unless you arrest them immediately at scene, otherwise you will not be able to catch the rioters, so I believe the regulation would prohibit them from covering up their identity," she said.

When it comes to the deterrent effects of establishing anti-mask law, Zou Pingxue, director of the Hong Kong and Macao Basic Law Research Center of Shenzhen University, said it could work on reducing the number of involving illegal activities as many stand for moderate side, which means that they won't risk their future to tangle with such chaotic scenes if there is no face-covering protection. In addition, it may lower the level of violence. Mostly, masked rioters tend to have no reservations about engaging in destructive actions as, with their identities hidden, they do not have to worry about the legal or moral ramifications. With no anonymity, the rioters will have to face the consequences of their hooliganism.

Never new in west

Meanwhile, mask ban in public is never new.

Many other places around the world have banned face coverings – the law was cited in the United States during the 2011 Occupy protests and during the Yellow Vest protests in France this year.

Many jurisdictions around the world have clearly noted that wearing masks at protests is a criminal offense.

Some critics say anti-mask laws in foreign countries mainly target Islamic extremist not ordinary citizens, and posit that the anti-mask ban will not help solve problems in Hong Kong but instead add fuel to the fire instead.

Such claims do not hold water. Countries ban face coverings to better manage rallies, assemblies, marches and demonstrations. Those covering their faces for religious, weather, health and other legitimate reasons are not covered by the ban.

In the United States, at least 15 states have anti-mask regulations. The first statewide law originated in 1845 in New York, making it a crime for any person to "appear in any road or public highway, or in any field, lot, wood or enclosure" with their "face painted, discolored, covered or concealed" or disguised in any manner to hide their identity.

In February 2013, the Liberal and Conservative parties of Canada voted unanimously in favor of the legislation of Bill C-309, which made it illegal to wear a mask or otherwise to conceal one's identity during a riot or unlawful assembly. The offender may face a penalty of up to 10 years in prison.

In European countries like Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark, Austria and Italy, anti-mask laws not only target Islamic extremists, but also violent protesters who attack police, vandalize public facilities and wreak havoc on the streets.

Australia's state of Victoria also passed laws in September 2017 to prohibit the covering of faces in violent protests. Those who commit violence while wearing a face mask could get 15 years behind bars.

In fact, the masked ones tend to be unconfident, flukey, or even harbor evil designs. Masks have become their shields from the truth and tools of sinfulness because they know that there is no legal punishment after wrongdoings.

While, in the short term, the anti-mask law might not scare off the core rioters and ringleaders, their following will surely shrink in the long run.

"Hong Kongers do have the right of freedom expression and demonstration according to the Basic Law of the HKSAR. People's participating in assemblies and protests is permitted, as long as in a peaceful way and in line with 'One Country, Two Systems' principle," Zou said, adding that it was a right thing that should be done.