Hong Kong Adopts Sweeping Security Laws, Bowing to Beijing

Hong Kong on Tuesday passed national security laws at the behest of Beijing, thwarting decades of public resistance in a move that critics say will strike a lasting blow to the partial autonomy the city had been promised by China.

Hong Kong already had a national security law, one that was imposed directly by China’s Communist Party leaders in 2020, after months of antigovernment demonstrations in the city. That law effectively silenced dissent in Hong Kong, sending opposition figures to jail or into exile.

The new legislation, which was passed with extraordinary speed, grants the authorities even more powers to crack down on opposition to Beijing and the Hong Kong government, establishing penalties — including life imprisonment — for political crimes like treason and insurrection, which are vaguely defined. It also targets offenses like “external interference” and the theft of state secrets, creating potential risks for multinational companies and international groups operating in the Asian financial center.

Analysts say the legislation, which will take effect on March 23, could have a chilling effect on a wide range of people, including entrepreneurs, civil servants, lawyers, diplomats, journalists and academics, raising questions about Hong Kong’s status as an international city.

In the eyes of Beijing, these laws are long overdue.

When Hong Kong, a former British colony, was returned to Chinese rule in 1997, it was given a mini-constitution designed to protect civil liberties unknown in mainland China, such as freedom of expression, assembly and the media. But China also insisted on a provision called Article 23, which required Hong Kong to draft a package of internal security laws to replace colonial-era sedition laws.

The first attempts to pass such legislation, in 2003, set off mass protests involving hundreds of thousands of people. Top officials resigned, and in the years that followed, city leaders were reluctant to raise the matter again, for fear of public backlash.

But in recent months, the Chinese Communist Party has urged the Hong Kong government to enact Article 23 laws. The city’s Beijing-backed leader, John Lee, has said the laws are needed to root out unrest and to fight what he calls espionage efforts by Western intelligence agencies.

There was little chance that China’s will would not be heeded; Hong Kong’s legislature has been overwhelmingly stacked with pro-Beijing lawmakers since China overhauled the electoral system to exclude candidates who aren’t considered “patriots.”

The new laws take aim at five types of offenses: treason, insurrection, theft of state secrets, sabotage and external interference. They also introduce key changes to due process. In some instances, the police may now seek permission from magistrates to prevent suspects from consulting with the lawyers of their choice, if that is deemed a threat to national security.

Human rights groups said that in swiftly passing the law, the authorities had reversed course on the freedoms once promised to the city.

Amnesty International said that the overarching purpose of the laws was to “stifle any and all criticism of the Chinese and Hong Kong authorities and their policies, within the city and globally.” The government has criticized rights advocacy groups based overseas as “anti-China” and “anti-government” organizations.

The legislation also empowers the city’s leader, known as the chief executive, to make new, related laws, which can carry penalties of up to seven years in prison, without going through the legislature. The leader would consult the cabinet before enacting any such law; the legislative council, known as the LegCo, would be able to amend or reject the law later.

Such a mechanism would not be new to Hong Kong, but it raises the potential for abuse, given how broadly written the new legislation is, said Thomas E. Kellogg, the executive director of the Center for Asian Law at Georgetown University.

“This is deeply disturbing,” Professor Kellogg wrote in an email. “The LegCo is handing the chief executive the power to expand the law even further, in ways that could further infringe on basic rights.”

The legislation’s vague wording — for example, in how it defines offenses like the theft of state secrets — is comparable to language found in security legislation in mainland China. And under the new laws, someone who shares “information that appears to be confidential matter,” even if it is not classified as a state secret, could be punished if that person intended to endanger national security, in the eyes of the authorities.

Business leaders in Hong Kong say such changes could raise the cost of operating in the city by requiring companies to scrutinize documents and other information shared by employees, to ensure that they do not inadvertently violate the new law.

One risk is that Hong Kong’s comparative business advantage over the mainland could be eroded, said Johannes Hack, the president of the German Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong.

“Part of the unique value Hong Kong has for Western (German) stakeholders is the openness of the city and we feel the balance between openness and the desire for security needs to be well calibrated,” he wrote in a message on WhatsApp.

Olivia Wang contributed reporting.