Amnesty International’s decision to quit Hong Kong is regrettable
- Organisations such as the human rights group need a clear understanding of the boundaries of the national security law and of the way it is implemented
A security crackdown has tested perceptions of Hong Kong’s values. The world has watched from afar, largely detached from arrests of activists and opposition lawmakers and the disbandment of civil society groups.
Now, rightly or wrongly, the perception abroad that times have changed has been sharpened by Amnesty International’s announcement that it is closing its Hong Kong operations. The rights agency says the implementation of the national security law has made human-rights work “effectively impossible” without fear of government reprisals.
What sets Amnesty apart is that it is the first overseas group of its kind to pull out of Hong Kong and will make a bigger impact abroad. It must be said that from the point of view of upholding and advancing human rights the decision is a pity and regrettable.
The government has pointed out, rightly, that the security law upholds human rights and stipulates that freedoms enjoyed by residents under the Basic Law and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are protected in the law.
That said, it is Amnesty’s prerogative to assess the risk to its personnel and act in what it sees as their best interests. But, given the London-based agency’s global mission, and Hong Kong’s location as a regional hub, it is a decision that is to be lamented.