Loading the Elevenlabs Text to Speech AudioNative Player...
Under Great Britain, Hong Kong was a free city. Not democratic, since residents didn’t choose or control their government. Nevertheless, the then-British colony protected free thought and expression. Hong Kongers could criticize public officials and cooperate with the world. These liberties initially survived the territory’s return to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). People could even stage protests pressing Beijing to fulfill its promise to preserve the separate system of what is now called the “Special Administrative Region” (SAR).
No longer, alas. Today the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) rules Hong Kong like it rules the mainland, with the partial exception of a thin veneer of a local authority. A new report from Human Rights Watch details the consequences:
Since adopting the National Security Law [NSL], the Chinese government has largely dismantled freedoms of expression, association and assembly, as well as free and fair elections, fair trial rights and judicial independence. The government has increasingly politicized education, created impunity for police abuses, and ended the city’s semi-democracy. Many of Hong Kong’s independent civil society groups, labor unions, political parties, and media outlets have been shuttered.
The Chinese government has been building a new and opaque national security legal regime and bureaucracy, weaponizing the courts to hand down severe punishment for dissent—up to life in prison—and harassing and surveilling Hong Kongers at home and abroad.
Five years ago Beijing imposed the draconian NSL on the nominally autonomous SAR. Assurances that the measure would have only limited application proved false. China ruthlessly imposed the law, which had little to do with national security and everything to do with CCP control. At Beijing’s behest, local authorities turned the legislation into a blueprint for tyranny. Mere criticism of communist rule is now treated as a dire threat to the territory’s security and thus a criminal offense—resulting in lengthy pretrial detention, almost certain conviction, and unfairly long imprisonment.
The measure was so effective because it was excessive and oppressive. Reported the New York Times: “More than 10,000 people were arrested during the monthslong uprising that began as peaceful mass rallies but grew sometimes violent as the police responded with force. Almost a quarter of those were convicted of crimes that include rioting and national security offenses.” Last year the Hong Kong authority, seeking the approbation of the PRC, added its own national security legislation. Under this measure too, Amnesty International found, people “have been targeted and harshly punished for the clothes they wear as well as the things they say and write, or for minor acts of protest, intensifying the climate of fear that already pervaded Hong Kong. Freedom of expression has never been under greater attack.”
In most cases prosecution was directed at thought crimes rather than criminal activities. A new Amnesty analysis found: “More than 80% of people convicted under Hong Kong’s National Security Law (NSL) have been wrongly criminalized and should never have been charged in the first place … . [Amnesty’s] analysis of 255 individuals targeted under national security legislation in Hong Kong since 30 June 2020 also showed that bail was denied in almost 90% of cases where charges were brought, and that those denied bail were forced to spend an average of 11 months in detention before facing trial.”
Tragic was the speedy collapse of a freedom movement that had turned out millions of protestors. Political parties, respected academics, independent jurists, critical journalists, democratic activists, and even elected officials were routed by Beijing’s brutal assault. Hong Kongers who failed to race for the exit were arrested and convicted for alleged offenses from years past. Those who later sought to flee faced charges akin to “Republikflucht” in East Germany.
Resistance to the Xi government’s takeover effectively ended almost immediately. Since then, the authorities have mounted an extended operation to mop up what little opposition remained, with an emphasis on retroactively punishing activists who originally escaped prosecution when street protests dominated the city. Local apparatchiks neither forgot nor forgave, filling Hong Kong’s gaol with those who refused to bend their knees to the territory’s new masters.
Still, the League of Social Democrats, established two decades ago, carried on, one of the SAR’s last pro-democracy parties. Alas, there was little democracy for it to defend. For instance, Hong Kong sentenced 45 political activists, including League founder Leung Kwok-hung, to as many as ten years in prison for organizing a primary for the Legislative Council election. Hong Kongers with inconvenient political views are no longer allowed to even run for office. As the anniversary of the NSL’s passage approached, the League closed down, pointing to “immense political pressure,” but added: “Even as we step aside, we stand with those still struggling in the shadows.”
In June, the China Labor Bulletin, which covered worker protests in the PRC, shut its doors as well. The organization cited financial issues, but according to the New York Times it “had also faced increased scrutiny in recent years amid a broader crackdown and silencing of civil society in Hong Kong.” The founder, Han Dongfang, said the authorities spied on his organization. This continues a process that Amnesty International once described as “an accelerating disappearance of independent civil society groups from the city.”
Beijing is satisfied with nothing short of total submission. Xia Baolong, China’s Director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, the territory’s real decider, emphasized that there was more repression to come: “We must clearly see that the anti-China and Hong Kong chaos elements are still ruthless and are renewing various forms of soft resistance.” The PRC’s local gauleiter, Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu, is ever ready to comply, turning to his Chinese masters whenever necessary. His government continues to find prosecution targets galore, recently announcing that various agencies “conducted a joint operation … in respect of a suspected case of ‘collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security’.”
Moreover, the SAR government openly uses its regulatory power to punish and persecute. Bookstores are often targeted, especially those carrying dissenting political content or run by former political activists. Raymond Yeung Tsz-chun, co-owner of Hillway Culture, which closed two years ago, observed: “A lot of bookshops in Hong Kong have been regularly checked by government departments.” He told Voice of America that his store was “checked monthly. This is like political pressure.”
Leticia Wong Man-huen, a former democracy activist and district councilor who owns Hunter Bookstore, said her shop is regularly visited by government officials, calling the intrusions “not normal.” Similarly, according to VOA, Mount Zero bookstore closed last year “after facing a series of warnings from government departments about minor violations, from the use of the alley for book talks to the paving of a small uneven public space in front of its entrance.” Raymond To, an artist and Mount Zero customer, said, “It’s getting hard for [independent booksellers] to exist.”
The authorities seek to enforce ideological conformity. With libraries and leading chain bookstores stripped of dissenting literature, independent venues have become a haven for free thinkers. “The Hong Kongers still treat these types of bookstores as a last resort,” opined Wong. “I guess the government also sees this point. They don’t want these liberal thoughts and space for civil society to remain.”
Even independent operators are cautious. Dexter Tse explained, “There are certain books we know are dangerous—really, really sensitive—and we will avoid them, such as those with an author who is a prominent political figure or already in jail.” Wong doesn’t sell volumes considered seditious by the authorities: “I’ll try to not censor, of course, but some books from the cover page or title are already sensitive.”
It isn’t just bookstores that face government harassment. Unsurprisingly, the regime targets journalists with a liberal bent. Hong Kong’s rating for press freedom by Reporters Without Borders has collapsed, falling from 80 in 2021 to 140 this year. In 2024 the CCP-backed authorities used British colonial sedition laws to jail journalists, while putting former Apple Daily publisher Jimmy Lai on trial for violating the NSL, for which he faces life imprisonment. His son Sebastien observed that “Hong Kong is now a place where some of its bravest and brightest citizens are sitting in jail” for reasons of “criminalizing the desire for freedom.”
For lesser threats the Lee regime deploys regulatory pressure. According to the Associated Press, “Hong Kong’s tax authorities targeted at least 20 people, including journalists, current or former heads of media organizations and their families, with audits without sufficient evidence.” Selina Cheng, who chairs the Hong Kong Journalists Association, noted that this undermines “press freedom,” which “not only means the ability for media and journalists to operate safely, physically ... It also means the business environment, whether it is sustainable for them to operate.”
Equally ominous is the use of business regulation against non-political operations by one-time democracy activists. Doing so serves no purpose other than to punish people for supporting liberty. Despite having violated no law then and being politically neutered now, their livelihoods are being threatened. Detailed the Associated Press:
Shops and eateries owned by people once associated with the largely subdued pro-democracy movement are feeling a tightening grip through increased official inspections, anonymous complaint letters and other regulatory checks. Those critical of the city’s political changes say it’s a less visible side of a push to silence dissent that began five years ago when Beijing imposed a national security law to crush challenges to its rule, under which opposition politicians were jailed and pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily was shuttered.
Lee is acting like an old-fashioned tyrant. AP revealed, “A bakery that put up pro-democracy decorations during the 2019 protests saw food authorities’ inspections jump from quarterly to monthly over the past one to two years, mostly over labeling complaints.” Indeed, the authorities have made clear that their complaints are political, not hygienic. At issue is the NSL, which everyone is at risk of violating, apparently through what has been called “soft resistance.” Beijing’s compliant factotums remain on the hunt for enemies: “In recent weeks, food authorities sent letters to restaurants warning that their business licenses could be revoked if the government deems them to be endangering national security or public interest” (emphasis added).
Even those who have ceased resistance suffer. Observed the Times: “Thousands of young people lost careers, friends and dreams after taking part in mass antigovernment protests that erupted six years ago in Hong Kong.” Moreover, there has been an exodus in the hundreds of thousands from Hong Kong since passage of the NSL and ensuing crackdown. Many want to protect their children from increasing educational indoctrination. According to the Migration Policy Institute: “Hong Kong has experienced a pronounced exodus, contributing to a drop in its domestic population of young professionals and others.”
Yet Beijing’s hirelings have only increased their efforts to demonstrate that they are worthy overseers. The BBC described a “culture of anonymous informing.” Observed one Hong Konger who asked not to be identified: “Whether it’s t-shirts, a song, a mobile game, books, a newspaper op-ed or a social media post expressing dissatisfaction with the government, the crackdown on anything deemed seditious only seems to escalate month by month.”
Hong Kong is a tragedy. China’s promises to preserve the territory’s traditional liberties have proved false. Chan Po-ying, who chaired the disappearing League of Social Democrats, observed: “One country, two systems has already (become) one country, one system.” In Hong Kong, the PRC now unashamedly rules.