Abstract: In view of the difference of the interpretation system, the Article 158 of the Basic Law established a mechanism of the two-track interpretation of the Basic Law. As typical cases of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal referred to the NPCSC, a series of cases of the right of abode in Hong Kong have shown the conflict between two different interpretation systems, and exposed the lack of restraint to the reference to NPCSC. The paper tries to perfect interpretation mechanism of the Basic Law by clarifying the division of jurisdiction between the courts of Hong Kong and the NPCSC and by establishing the restraint mechanisms to the reference to NPCSC to interpret the Basic Law.