With the implementation of Beijing’s Hong Kong National Security Law in 2020, the authorities in Hong Kong have either arrested or forced key opposition figures into exile. Stringent electoral reforms have ensured that the Legislative Council or LegCo is now predominantly composed of “patriots.” China’s leadership has seen success in this endeavor, as demonstrated by the swift passing of the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance (SNSO) by the LegCo on March 19, with a unanimous vote of 89 to 0 within a record-setting 11 days. This marks a significant shift from 21 years ago when a similar attempt had to be abandoned due to public protests.
The Legislative Council, now filled with pro-Beijing lawmakers after the opposition-free elections of 2021, showed minimal opposition to the over 200 pages of the SNSO that touch on the city’s core rights and freedoms. Instead, they competed to express support for the legislation, which grants authorities enhanced powers to suppress any form of opposition, real or perceived.
The swift passage of the law aimed to preempt any criticism, particularly from international sources, and also served as a display of authority. The decision was made beforehand, despite the facade of democratic processes. State media even reported the outcome 20 minutes before the votes were cast by the delegates.
The alignment of Hong Kong’s government and legislature with Beijing’s vision carries significant implications. The official rationale for drafting the SNSO reflects the ideological framework of the Chinese Communist Party, which now shapes the city’s legislative processes. Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee praised Xi Jinping’s comprehensive concept of national security, encompassing various aspects from regime security to economic and cyber development, with little regard for individual or private sector rights.
The new security law further restricts civil liberties in Hong Kong, expanding on the previous National Security Law imposed by Beijing in 2020. It introduces vaguely defined offenses related to insurrection, treason, external interference, or espionage, including the ambiguous “incitement to disaffection.” The law emphasizes countering “external forces” and foreign interference, with broad definitions of illegal activities involving foreign contacts or information exchanges.
The extraterritorial applicability of many offenses raises concerns for entities registered in Hong Kong, including media outlets and rights organizations, and potentially affecting corporate entities engaged in data gathering or legal activities. The erosion of rights and liberties in Hong Kong mirrors trends seen in mainland China, blurring the line between politics and business.
As Hong Kong officials adopt a security-centric perspective, dissenting voices and civil society are increasingly stifled. The enactment of the SNSO has drawn criticism from international bodies and governments, warning of the law’s impact on Hong Kong’s reputation as a business hub. Key areas to monitor include judicial independence, rule of law, and government transparency, as Hong Kong moves towards aligning with mainland political practices.