It was justifiable and reasonable for Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, to be denied entry to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region on Sunday when the priority of the HKSAR is to bring an end to the chaos, which is now in its seventh month.

It is the chaos caused by the rioters, characterized by violence and vandalism, that has dealt a heavy blow to human rights in the SAR, despite the rioters claiming what they are doing is fighting for freedom and democracy.

Roth said in a post on his Twitter account that the authorities had blocked his entry to Hong Kong, which he said illustrated the worsening problem in the city.

But the human rights situation in the city is worsening because of the violence and vandalism of the protesters. Their attacks against innocent residents and their vandalism of public transport infrastructure and public facilities have seriously infringed upon the human rights of other Hong Kong residents.

Roth was wrong when he said: "This disappointing action is yet another sign that Beijing is tightening its oppressive grip on Hong Kong and further restricting the limited freedom Hong Kong people enjoy under 'one country, two systems'."

It is the violence encouraged by the double standard about human rights being upheld by people such as Roth that has emboldened the rioters to restrict the freedom of those Hong Kong residents who want to go about their normal lives. No matter how violent the protests are and to what extent the rioters trample on the rights of others, their actions are justifiable to Roth and others in the West as long as the perpetrators claim to be opposing "Beijing's oppression" and fighting for freedom and democracy.

Because the rioting is happening in a Chinese city they try to blur the definitions of freedom and anarchy.

In their minds' eye, the difference between freedom and anarchy is crystal clear when it comes to violent demonstrations in their own countries. They know violent protests have nothing to do with human rights, and only infringe upon the human rights of others.

But for some such as Roth, the definitions of freedom and anarchy can be blurred when it comes to the violent demonstrations in Hong Kong. The same methods used by Western police when used by the Hong Kong police are labeled police brutality. Their arguments could not be more perjured.

Given the prejudicial intent of Roth's visit, is there any reason the Hong Kong Immigration Department should grant him entry to the region?