The Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, in its statement on May 6 condemning the Hong Kong protest violence over the last 10 months, stated among other things, “The sword of the law to demonstrate deterrence did not appear to be here yet in Hong Kong”. It urged “all individuals and institutions with public authority in the city should do their duty to counter the political virus of violence”.

The HKMAO was obviously referring to the dismal number of convictions for violence committed during last year’s social unrest. Despite the police having arrested 8,337 people so far for various related offenses, the Department of Justice has approved the prosecution of only 1,365 of them, which resulted in only 87 convictions, with most of the convicted receiving minimal punishments ranging from fines, community service and, at most, custodial sentences of less than 12 months. All this can hardly be regarded as an effective deterrence.

It is thus gratifying to see the proverbial sword of justice has finally been drawn. On Friday, a 22-year-old lifeguard, Sin Ka-ho, the first anti-government protester to plead guilty to the charge of rioting during last year’s unrest, was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment — the heaviest sentence meted out so far in connection with the unrest.

But what is most significant is that the trial judge, District Court Judge Amanda Jane Woodcock, has remarked that the threshold for the sentence of rioting should be six years and that the seriousness of the offense demands a deterrent sentence. It was only because of the defendant’s clean record, his show of remorse and his guilty plea that the sentence was reduced to four years.

Police can consider making a special appeal to those rioters to come forward to cooperate with the police. If they can provide information on the masterminds or the financiers behind the riots and are prepared to give evidence in court, they could be included in the “resident informant scheme”, under which they can have their respective sentences substantially reduced

It was noted that the defendant’s behavior was bad, for “doggedly and relentlessly” attacking police officers with umbrellas and hard objects. But he is surely not the worst among the rioters when compared with those involved in throwing gasoline bombs, corrosive fluid, or shooting arrows or hurling stones from catapults at police officers. It is, therefore, safe to assume these rioters can expect longer sentences if convicted — possibly up to the maximum 10 years in jail.

So far, about 600 people have been prosecuted for rioting offenses and are pending trial, and many more have been arrested and awaiting the DOJ’s decision to prosecute. Until then, they can look forward to many sleepless nights.

Police must capitalize on the deterrent effect of this case. It should generate more publicity on social media by, for example, quoting the words of the judge or the repentant words of the defendant spoken in his mitigation in court: “I have set a bad example for those young people yearning for change. If I had the opportunity to talk to them, I would urge them not to resort to violence.”

Police can consider making a special appeal to those rioters to come forward to cooperate with the police. If they can provide information on the masterminds or the financiers behind the riots and are prepared to give evidence in court, they could be included in the “resident informant scheme”, under which they can have their respective sentences substantially reduced. According to a chief justice sentencing guidelines, defendants prepared to provide full assistance to police or the Independent Commission Against Corruption in corruption or organized crime cases, and who give true and full evidence in court against the major culprits, can have their sentences reduced by up to two-thirds. This means if the rioter’s normal sentence is four years, the sentence can be reduced to 16 months, and with a further reduction for good behavior in jail, he can be expected to be released in 12 months. These resident informers will be located in a specially protected prison in Siu Lam so they will have a relatively hassle-free time in prison. This should be a great incentive for young and remorseful offenders to take the opportunity to swiftly turn a new page in their lives.

This case will be a blow to the morale of the protest movement. As they now have one of their once-aggressive fellow protesters pleading guilty to rioting and the plea has been accepted by the court, this means that the court has de facto classified their protest campaign as a riot. Hence, one of their five demands for “retracting the classification of the protests as riots” is now voided by the judiciary. It also means their other demand for amnesty has become irrelevant as the judicial process for those arrested is now progressing ahead. Thus, two of their five demands are thrown out the window! If these protesters continue to show their five fingers to signal their “five demands”, they will now look very stupid!

But the sword of justice should not be directed only at the young rioters. In a way, they are the victims of a corrupt education system that purveys falsehoods, and some of them were further exploited by political opportunists. Meanwhile, those educators who misled the protesters have blood on their hands, and must be punished and publicly sanctioned. They include at least two vice-principals of two separate schools, Ho Pak-yan and Tai Kin-fai, found to have cursed the police on their respective Facebook pages; a lecturer of the Education University, Choi Chun-wai, who made libelous attacks against police on a Radio Television Hong Kong show; and two senior staff of the examination authority, Lo Ka-yiu and Yeung Wing-yu, found to have posted contentious remarks on their Facebook pages and believed to be involved in designing the Diploma of Secondary Education Chinese history examination that includes a scandalous anti-China trick question. These people are clearly unsuitable to remain in education and must be expelled to demonstrate the sword of justice and to protect our students.

As pointed out in the declaration of the recently established Hong Kong Coalition, the city is now at a crossroads of make or break, or rise and fall. These testing times demand each and every one of us to think and choose: Do we go for continuous confrontation, internal rifts and unceasing bickering, or do we join together to break the impasse? Those who once supported the “blackshirts” and other extremists and who see their futures ruined for pushing an unrealistic agenda and causing untold economic damage and social chaos should ask how they would feel if these misguided young people were their children. Hong Kong used to be a pragmatic and harmonious place. And that was the secret recipe for our earlier success. It is time to revisit our old values to chart our way forward. Our idealistic young people should never again be used as expendable political fodder!

The author is an adjunct professor of HKU Space and a council member of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies. He is a former deputy commissioner of the ICAC and an active international anti-corruption consultant.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.