Author: Jahangir HUSEYNOV
Barges decorated with red banners bearing giant golden hieroglyphs have been circling in the beautiful Victoria Harbour for several days, congratulating the citizens of Hong Kong on the introduction of the new law on state security. Neon flags hang along the major roads of the city, heralding a new era of stability and prosperity. In fact, all these decorations contrast strongly with the mood of a large portion of this mega city with a population of 8 million people.
For most of the past year, Hongkongers have protested against the so-called extradition law that would allow the extradition of protest activists to Beijing. Now, when they seem to win the ‘battle’ with the bill withdrawn, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) decided to put an end to the independence of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
On June 30, the National People's Congress unanimously adopted the State Security Law. In fact, it paved the way for the most radical changes in the lifestyle of the former British colony since it reverted to Chinese rule 23 years ago.
The newly established National Security Administration fully staffed by the representatives of mainland China will control the law and order in Hong Kong from now on.
The employees of the department will have very broad rights, as they are not required to comply with the laws of Hong Kong and will not be subject to ‘screening, search or detention’. Their large-scale responsibilities now include the control and administration of the activities of the city administration and police. They are also responsible for collecting intelligence and conducting criminal cases directly related to the threat to national security.
The new law is aimed at clarifying the definition of a threat to the national security.
Worldwide jurisdiction
According to the new law, the crimes of separatism, subversion, terrorism, conspiracy with foreigners, inciting hatred against the central government of China and the regional government of Hong Kong, are punishable by imprisonment from three years to life.
However, legal experts believe that there are no clear definitions of these crimes in the law, which can lead to their broad interpretation. For example, is any criticism of the authorities, both local and central, means “inciting hatred”? Immediately after the publication of the law, reporters asked Hong Kong’s Justice Minister Teresa Chen to clarify the provision. But she could not give a clear answer.
Perhaps because the law says that the prerogative of its interpretation belongs exclusively to the judicial and political authorities of mainland China, not Hong Kong. Moreover, the provisions of the new law have priority in case of conflict with the city's legislation.
Hong Kong police can now conduct searches of premises without a court order, order ISPs to remove content or confiscate their equipment.
ISPs and individuals should remove or block any electronic messages or information on the Internet that is considered a threat to national security, or block access to this information.
Lawsuits may be conducted by decision of the authorities behind closed doors to preserve state secrets, maintain public order, or take into account “other circumstances”.
According to Donald Clarke, a professor of Chinese law at George Washington University, some of the provisions of the Hong Kong law are harsher than mainland ones. Especially when it comes to criticism of the authorities from foreigners, even those outside Hong Kong.
By and large, Clarke says, the law provides for criminal jurisdiction over anyone on the planet for acts committed anywhere in the world (such as criticising the Chinese party and political leadership), which is much broader than the scope of the Chinese Criminal Code. Donald Clark advises anyone, whose occupation is not in any way related to China, but who said or did anything that could attract the attention of Hong Kong law enforcement agencies, stay away from Hong Kong, China and countries, which cannot refuse Beijing's request for that person’s extradition.
Tension in social media
Legal experts believe that the national security law can apply to anyone in Hong Kong from active dissidents to ordinary citizens discussing politics in private. Any comment or statement that criticises the Chinese government may fall under the national security law.
Harsh potential fines (up to $13,000), up to life imprisonment, scared many smartphone owners and the web users.
Some are rushing to download encrypted messaging apps, while others are cleaning up their social media posts and downloading VPN apps. And this is done by all without exception: both opponents of Beijing's interference in Hong Kong affairs and supporters. Even people who are not particularly interested in politics admit that they are worried, and no longer for themselves, but for their more open-minded friends.
WhatsApp, Facebook, Google, Twitter and Zoom announced in early July that they are suspending the processing of requests from the Hong Kong authorities to obtain user data, and are monitoring developments in an attempt to assess the impact of the new law on human rights.
Opposition activists have already begun to leave the city. For example, the National Front of Hong Kong announced that it would cease operations in the city and relocate its activities outside the country.
Not only oppositionists are leaving, but also ordinary citizens. They already talk about the second exodus, remembering how in 1997 millions of residents fled from Hong Kong in anticipation of the transfer of the city to the jurisdiction of China. But then many of them returned, convinced that China kept its promise not to interfere in the affairs of the former British colony. Now there are no such hopes, experts say.
World countries divided
Dozens of countries around the world expressed their attitude to the events in Hong Kong. The number of those who supported and condemned the actions of China is approximately equal - more than 70 countries on each side. To date, only Great Britain and Taiwan have made more or less specific proposals for Hongkongers wishing to emigrate from the country.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson promised the holders of special passports BN (O) possessed by about 3 million Hongkongers born before the return of the former British colony to China in 1997, an easier procedure for obtaining British citizenship.
Taiwan is also preparing to welcome Hong Kong residents, but fears the infiltration of Chinese spies as well, Reuters reported. Japan is hastily preparing proposals to create a particularly preferential treatment for specialists from Hong Kong who want to relocate to the country. In the United States, lawmakers from both parties have come up with a bill to grant refugee status to Hong Kong residents facing persecution. The German authorities and other EU official have announced that they already have appropriate laws on immigration.
In principle, that is all the world community had to say about the problems in Hong Kong. The West does not intend to take any concrete actions, sanctions (serious, not formal) for a number of reasons, as it is struggling with own economic problems. Plus there is China's deep integration into the economies of many countries, including Europe, etc.
The US announced it will stop exporting defense equipment and restrict the use of dual-use technology in Hong Kong, but it is hard to say whether this is practised actually.
In July, the US House and Senate unanimously approved a bill requiring mandatory sanctions on individuals, who help end Hong Kong's “high degree of autonomy” from mainland China, as well as on the financial institutions that finance such individuals.
The bill was urgently passed by the Congress and is awaiting Mr. Trump's approval. But no one knows when he will sign and whether he will do it at all. Late month, Mr. Trump refused to impose sanctions on Chinese officials for human rights violations in forced detention camps in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.
Calls for a more fundamental rethinking of Britain's strategy towards China are growing in the UK, but not everyone shares this growing skepticism, including Prime Minister Johnson. Influential circles in government and parliament believe that the UK cannot afford a political battle with Beijing exactly when it needs Chinese investment to lift the economy after Brexit and the pandemic.
Hard math
It seems that Chinese President Xi Jinping chose the right time to extend his influence to Hong Kong. High-ranking Chinese officials admit in informal conversations that China are not going to prevent the emigration of Hong Kong residents, as they understand that the main businesses and highly qualified personnel will remain in the city not willing to lose good income. And there are many signals from businesses about their readiness to cooperate with Beijing if the new law does not directly affect their interests.
The American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham), the most influential business group in Hong Kong with some 1,400 member companies, said it remains committed to Hong Kong as a base for international business. All it needs is to get clarity from the government about how the law will be interpreted and applied, and about its implications for American businesses operating and investing in the city. The operation of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange also manifests the calmness among the big business entities. The Hang Seng Index recovered from a sharp fall. The Hong Kong dollar remains strong. There is no capital outflow.
Parliamentary elections in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region are scheduled for Sptember. Their outcome will show whether the residents of the city have retained the rebellious spirit throughout the past 23 years. Will they be able to get their representatives into the supreme legislative body, or will all 70 seats, for the first time in history, be occupied by the supporters of the central government?
RECOMMEND: