Hong Kong pushes for new security law to eradicate 'seeds of unrest'

Hong Kong's government will enact a long-standing security law to curb foreign influence and expand the definition of crimes such as stealing state secrets and treason, officials announced Tuesday, in a move expected to dampen dissent at the will further silence once-free Chinese territory.

The proposed law would identify five major areas of crimes: treason, insurrection, theft of state secrets, sabotage and outside interference. Some definitions are said to reflect China's treatment of these crimes in mainland China.

“Foreign intelligence organizations, the CIA and British intelligence services have publicly stated that they are doing a lot of work against China and Hong Kong,” the city's leader, John Lee, said at a news conference announcing the push. Internally, the city also continues to face “the seeds of unrest,” he continued.

The law, he said, “is intended to protect us from attacks by foreign forces and by foreign countries.”

The proposal, known as Article 23 legislation, has long been a major political flashpoint in Hong Kong, a former British colony that was promised certain freedoms when it returned to Chinese control in 1997. The government first tried to implement it in 2003, but backed out after major protests from residents who feared it would restrict civil liberties. Since then, successive leaders have postponed attempts to revive the legislation required by Hong Kong's mini-constitution, fearing further backlash.

But in 2020, Hong Kong's central government imposed a sweeping national security law after months of fierce street protests against Beijing's growing influence in the city. Over the past three years, authorities have used this law to virtually eradicate the city's political opposition, reshape elections and severely restrict the media and free speech.

Hong Kong officials say the new law will complement Beijing's law and put an end to what Lee said were hostile forces that “still lurk in our society.” Critics say this will further decimate human rights.

“The goal is to gain total control over Hong Kong's activities, including freedom of expression,” said Patrick Poon, a visiting scholar at the University of Tokyo who is originally from Hong Kong. He conducts research into freedom of expression in Hong Kong and China.

“It's something we expected to happen back in 2003, which is why half a million people took to the streets to try to stop it,” Mr Poon added.

The government has not yet released a full draft of the bill. Instead, it published a long “public consultation document”, which set out officials' justifications for the law and general proposals for its content. It says residents can comment on the document in the coming month.

But many of the proposals would create a future in which criticism of policies like this would become increasingly risky.

For example, the new offense of “external interference” would make it a crime to collaborate with an “external force” to influence “the formulation or implementation of any policy or measure.” External forces, the proposal said, could include foreign governments or political organizations.

The provision on state secrets also explicitly refers to legislative language in mainland China, which gives authorities sweeping power to classify critical voices as a threat to national security. Last year, Beijing introduced a revised counterintelligence law that broadened the category of espionage; In recent months, China's state security agency has suggested that negative commentary on China's economy could pose a threat to national security.

The proposed Hong Kong law would expand the potential scope of state secrets to anything related to “major policy decisions,” “economic and social development” or “the relationship between the central authorities” and the Hong Kong government.

“It is very arbitrary and broad,” Mr Poon said, noting in particular the vague definitions used to describe state secrets and interference.

Officials said the new law was necessary even after Beijing enacted its own security law because external threats had not yet been fully eradicated. The government proposal listed nine perceived threats to national security, including “incitement to public hatred” against the state and “barbaric and gross interference” by foreign governments.

“Although social order has been restored since the implementation” of Beijing's security law, the proposal continued, “some criminals have still not given up and are waiting for an opportunity to commit violent attacks or carry out terrorist activities.”

Officials from Hong Kong and Beijing have fervently denied that they are infringing on civil liberties, arguing that countries that have criticized security laws, including the United States, also have national security laws. Mr Lee accused critics of “bad statements and political attacks”.

He said he would set up a “rebuttal team” to push back on criticism of the law. The government would also contact foreign consulates and chambers of commerce to explain how the law would benefit businesses, he said.

“I want the government to be in full swing to explain loudly and clearly, confidently and rightly what we are doing here, to tell the world that we are only protecting ourselves from your attacks,” Mr Lee said. “Don't attack us.”

“I think ultimately when people see that this law will bring security and stability,” he added, “they will love it.”