Article 23 legislation was first proposed and withdrawn after mass protests more than 20 years ago. It took less than two months to be approved this time, with no opposition in Hong Kong’s legislature. Lawmakers debating the legislation on Tuesday overwhelmingly supported its passage, describing it as a historic “milestone” and a “responsibility.”
Both the laws themselves and the way in which they were passed demonstrate how Hong Kong is being further remade in mainland China’s image, as Chinese leader Xi Jinping has made national security the government’s priority. The legislation also risks further eroding Hong Kong’s status as a financial center, with businesses particularly worried about vague definitions of state secrets.
Hong Kong had already been transformed in recent years by a national security law, imposed by Beijing in 2020 in the wake of months of mass demonstrations in 2019 against China’s tightening control over the city.
That law led to the transformation of Hong Kong via the shuttering of civil society groups and news outlets, the arrest of more than 200 people — many of them jailed — and an exodus of Hong Kongers. All who have been charged under the security law have been convicted.
Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee said the new Article 23 law is meant to complement the existing national security apparatus.
Chris Tang, Hong Kong’s security chief, said during the legislative debate on Tuesday that together, the two laws “will form a complete legal system to safeguard national security.”
“Since our reunification 26 years ago, there’s finally a complete overhaul of the legal system to safeguard national security,” he said.
Hong Kong, a former British colony, was handed over to Chinese control in 1997 under a framework known as “one country, two systems” that granted it some autonomy, including a thriving civil society, independent press and a business environment free from government interference.
“The Hong Kong government, having already presided over an erosion of human rights in the city with the Beijing-imposed 2020 National Security Law, is now taking repression to the next level,” said Amnesty International’s China director, Sarah Brooks.
This Article 23 security law has loomed over the city’s 7.4 million residents for years. Under Hong Kong’s Basic Law, which has governed its relationship with Beijing since 1997, the city is required to enact national security legislation. A first attempt to introduce the law in 2003 prompted half a million people to protest in the streets, forcing authorities to withdraw the legislation.
This time, the legislation was processed “at full speed,” according to Lee. With dissent muted under the Beijing-drafted 2020 national security law, it has met little resistance. During a second reading of the draft legislation on Tuesday, lawmakers pledged their support for the measure one after another.
Connie Lam said she would endorse the law, “even at the cost of having her body smashed into pieces.” Another lawmaker, Dennis Leung, said the law was the “greatest blessing” for Hong Kongers.
The Hong Kong government said 98.6 percent of the comments it received over a one-month public consultation period that ended last week were positive.
Still, some groups have registered their opposition. Business and legal groups say the law, in its vagueness, will detract from the city’s appeal as a financial hub safe for investment. The Law Society of Hong Kong said in its comments on the draft legislation that the commercial sector “requires certainty in the business environment it is operating in.”
The Hong Kong Journalists Association said the law will further restrict the media environment, where self-censorship has become commonplace since the 2020 national security law.
Hong Kong media mogul Jimmy Lai, publisher of the now-shuttered Apple Daily, is facing trial under the 2020 national security law.
Such measures will “seriously deepen the chilling effect that has already occurred, and turn Hong Kong into a city with one voice,” the HKJA said in a statement.
Rights advocates say the law’s broad definition of the crime of external interference could also criminalize a broad range of interactions with foreign governments and organizations. Hong Kong and mainland Chinese authorities have long blamed the wave of protests in 2019 on foreign actors.
“The evil nature of anti-China and anti-Hong Kong forces have been entrenched in Hong Kong for a long time … there are still ‘worms’ ready to move and waiting to cause chaos,” China’s Ministry of State Security said in a statement this month.
Shibani Mahtani in Singapore and Vic Chiang in Taipei, Taiwan, contributed to this report.
