bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

sponsorType

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

Alex Lo

Oh, boy, the new security law is terrible. What is it going to do to civil liberties, investigative journalism, freedom of speech, or even freedom of thought and expression such as protests?
Yeah, I am worried too. What’s going to happen now?
Law enforcement agencies can target anyone suspected or accused of aiding hostile foreign states. For the first time, someone will be deemed “an undeclared foreign spy” if they are shown to have been “materially assisting the activities of a foreign intelligence service”.
“We will always do everything possible to protect the [country],” a top official declared.
“State threats are an evolving challenge and the new offences and powers … will ensure that our intelligence services and law enforcement have the tools they need to counter them,” another senior security official said.
Law enforcement agents will have “the means to stop those seeking by illegitimate means to influence public figures”.
But what are those illegitimate means?
Well, pretty much whatever the authorities consider “illegitimate”. The new law “introduces specific powers to help law enforcement take action against, and obtain evidence in relation to, those acting on behalf of foreign states against the [country] and its interests. This could include, for example, those who aid a foreign power by distributing information which has been illegally obtained … The new powers include enhanced arrest and detention powers and a modernised search warrant power …”
That may sound very vague and ill-defined, and that is exactly the point.
US, Britain criticise ‘incredibly vague’ new Hong Kong national security law
In a related new law, police can basically stop any protest once it is declared “unlawful”, and they have almost total discretion in deciding what is “unlawful”. The vague and ill-defined criteria include “serious public disorder, serious damage to property, or significant and prolonged disruption to the life of the community”.
Causing traffic jams? Tick. Being too noisy to the neighbours? Tick. Disturbing “community”? That could be anyone, even passers-by, who may be negatively affected.
You mean like what the government of Justin Trudeau did to those poor truck drivers/protesters in Canada in 2022?
Sort of. But Trudeau used the existing Emergencies Act, which basically meant he could declare a state of emergency and do whatever he wanted, such as arresting and jailing the protest leaders and freezing their bank accounts and other assets, even controlling access to lawyers.
You can get into all that trouble for just being too noisy and disruptive in Canada?
Well, you know, it is the Great White North.
OK, I got that. Now, let’s get back to what we have been talking about originally.
What’s that clause in the new law about “cumulative disruption”?
That means as a protester or organiser, you may be legally held responsible even if you have been peaceful, so long as some other protest elements prove disruptive or violent. And they don’t have to be protesting the same thing you do, so long as you are all in proximity.
The “huge expansion of police powers” means police could find a way to argue that any protest meets the threshold for imposing restrictions or simply an outright ban. It will depend a lot on whether they or their political bosses approve of the message or the cause behind a protest.
This law, by the way, was fast-tracked through a constitutional trick that had never been used before to avoid serious parliamentary scrutiny.
That’s terrible! What’s going to happen to the people of Hong Kong now?
Hong Kong? No, I was talking about Britain, you know, the National Security Act that came into effect barely three months ago, and the Public Order Act from last year.
What? They are doing all that in the United Kingdom, the land of parliamentary democracy? Then why is Lord Cameron getting all hot and bothered with his Western pals about our Article 23 security legislation? Our law almost pales in comparison.
Well, you know, it’s the Brits. They think they are still in charge.


Hong Kong scraps New Year’s Eve fireworks, moves countdown to Central

How will Jimmy Lai’s conviction affect China-UK ties and Keir Starmer’s planned visit?

Peking University keen to start research institute in Hong Kong’s Northern Metropolis

Hong Kong Bar Association chief urges critics to assess Jimmy Lai verdict fairly

Hong Kong politics

Why is Britain complaining about the Article 23 legislation?

Members of the League of Social Democrats hold up a banner which reads “Without democracy, there can be no livelihood, “Put the people above the country, human rights above the regime, February 27, 2024. Photo: AFP

Hong Kong’s Article 23 law: Beijing says ‘clumsy political shows’ by foreign forces won’t upset city’s path to prosperity

Beijing has batted back against foreign critics of the Article 23 law for two straight days. Photo: May Tse

Beijing’s point man on Hong Kong affairs tells city leader he’s ‘very satisfied’ with quick passage of Article 23 national security law

City leader John Lee (left) meets Xia Baolong, director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office. Photo: Handout 

A photo of the meeting attended by top officials and lawmakers in Shenzhen. Photo: HKMAO

Hong Kong’s Article 23 law: end of early release for national security offenders likely to be first clear change when legislation takes effect

The Safeguarding National Security Bill was passed unanimously by lawmakers on Tuesday. Photo: Bloomberg

Opinion

New security and public order laws that have gone into effect in the UK are arguably even more draconian than what was just passed in Hong Kong


New security and public order laws that have gone into effect in the UK are arguably even more draconian than what was just passed in Hong Kong.


Diplomacy

Expresses the views, ideas and conclusions of the author. (Eg. Enough of Crazy Rich Asians, think of crazy poor Hongkongers.)


Column

My Take

.css-1m2rp1p{color:#34b8b5;}My Take | Why is Britain complaining about the Article 23 legislation?

.css-1mniedq{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;}New security and public order laws that have gone into effect in the UK are arguably even more draconian than what was just passed in Hong Kong

My Take | Why is Britain complaining about the Article 23 legislation?

New security and public order laws that have gone into effect in the UK are arguably even more draconian than what was just passed in Hong Kong