Hong Kong lawmakers on Tuesday last week passed an amendment to Article 23 of the Basic Law, which grants the government more power to quash dissent. The new national security legislation is the latest step in a sweeping political crackdown triggered by pro-democracy protests in 2019.
When Hong Kong was handed over to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) by the UK in 1997, it was done according to the “one country, two systems” principle, which was supposed to protect the territory’s autonomy. Article 23 at that time stated that Hong Kong “shall prohibit by law any act that damages the national unity or subverts the Central People’s Government.”
A previous attempt to amend Article 23 in 2003 was scrapped following peaceful protests, with more than 500,000 people marching on the streets.
This time, after Beijing imposed a National Security Law Beijing in 2020, which largely silenced opposition voices in the territory, the Hong Kong Legislative Council, packed with Beijing loyalists following an electoral overhaul, took only 11 days to complete an amendment to Article 23, from unveiling the bill on March 8 to unanimously passing the law on Tuesday last week. It took effect on Saturday.
Article 23 now states that Hong Kong “shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the PRC government, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organisations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organisations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organisations or bodies.”
The new law has aroused concerns over the vagueness of its language. It massively extended the HK authorities’ power to expand the scope of national security and threatened stringent penalties for actions authorities considered threats to security, with the most severe for life imprisonment and lesser offenses could lead to 10 to 20 years in jail.
The legislation allows for closed-door trials and grants the police rights to detain suspects for 16 days without charge. Beijing has also implemented regulations that mean some cases could be tried in mainland China.
Hong Kong Secretary for Justice Paul Lam (林定國) has warned that a person might commit an offense if they repost online critical statements issued by foreign nations and people overseas, depending on their “intention and purpose.”
Hong Kong Secretary for Security Chris Tang (鄧炳強) warned that “if you breached the law, I will definitely find evidence against you.”
Since the implementation of Beijing’s National Security Law, nearly 300 people have been arrested, with dozens prosecuted for sedition, mostly for online posts critical of the authorities. Numerous pro-democracy media outlets have been shut down. Airport data show that an estimated 530,000 residents have left the territory and not returned.
The territory, which had been third on the Human Freedom Index, had plummeted to 46th place by last year. Its reputation as an international financial center has gone, losing its No. 1 ranking in the Economic Freedom of the World report. Its benchmark Hang Seng index has lost more than 40 percent in the past three years, and property sales have fallen to the lowest level in three decades.
The new legislation has eroded Hong Kong’s civil liberties and the autonomy that Beijing promised to preserve for at least 50 years. British Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs David Cameron said it is “a clear breach of the agreement the UK struck with China for the handover” and “a demonstration of China breaking its international commitments.”
In Taipei, the government has urged people to avoid traveling to the territory, as the law gives Hong Kong authorities broad powers to imprison foreigners.
The law should be a warning that Beijing’s “one country, two systems” proposal for unification would eventually become “one China” rule, sacrificing the autonomy and freedoms that Taiwanese enjoy.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS