Hong Kong: New National Security Subsidiary Legislation Further Intensifies Repression
New national security measures strengthen Beijings stranglehold on freedoms.
(BANGKOK, May 30, 2025)—New national security measures announced in Hong Kong two weeks ago further intensify the crackdown on freedom of expression, association, assembly, and other basic human rights in the city and undermine the rule of law, judicial independence, and Hong Kong's promised autonomy, Fortify Rights said today. A new 'Safeguarding National Security Regulation' came into effect on May 13, 2025, fast-tracked through the city's Legislative Council just one day after the Hong Kong Security Bureau published proposals for subsidiary legislation.
'These new measures intensify Hong Kong's continuing slide into authoritarianism,' said Benedict Rogers, Senior Director at Fortify Rights. 'Further alignment of Hong Kong's judicial system with Beijing's is deeply concerning given the latter's complete lack of judicial independence and widespread use of torture, arbitrary detention, and enforced disappearance.'
The new regulations strengthen measures adopted under the draconian National Security Law (NSL) imposed on Hong Kong by Beijing on June 30, 2020, and an additional domestic security law enacted by the Beijing-controlled Legislative Council under Article 23 of the Basic Law, Hong Kong's mini-constitution, on March 23, 2024. In particular, the new subsidiary legislation strengthens and details procedures for mainland China's ability to exercise jurisdiction over national security cases in Hong Kong, as set out in Article 55 of the 2020 NSL, allowing for prosecutions and trials to take place in the mainland itself.
The new measures also designate six sites in Hong Kong – including four hotels–as prohibited locations, because they are bases for the national security bureau. These include the Metropark Hotel Causeway Bay, the City Garden Hotel in North Point, the Island Pacific Hotel in Sai Wan, a China Travel Service hotel in Hung Hom, and two locations along Hoi Fan Road in Tai Kok Tsui.
Under the additional regulations, anyone disclosing information about the activities of the Office for Safeguarding National Security in Hong Kong, which is under the direct control of the central government in Beijing, would face a prison sentence of up to seven years.
The impact of the security laws imposed by Beijing over the past five years has led to an almost complete dismantling of civil society. The laws apply to the crimes of treason, sedition, secession, subversion, and state secrets, including 'collusion' with foreign forces—vaguely defined terms that have been used imprison pro-democracy activists and shutdown civil society activities.
Over the past six years, an estimated 1,000 political prisoners have been jailed, including those arrested during the 2019 pro-democracy protests. These include former democratically elected legislators, journalists, lawyers, and human rights defenders.
Among the most prominent political prisoners are the media entrepreneur Jimmy Lai, founder of the pro-democracy Apple Daily newspaper, and human rights lawyer Chow Hang-tung.
Chow Hang-tung, 40, has been imprisoned since 2021 for her role leading an annual vigil to commemorate the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, serving multiple sentences. She is charged with inciting subversion under the NSL and has been detained for more than 1,000 days.
Jimmy Lai, 77, a British citizen, has been in solitary confinement for more than 1,600 days, held for more than 23 hours a day with no natural light and permitted less than an hour a day for physical exercise. He has been denied the right to independent medical treatment and his first choice of legal counsel, and his international legal team at Doughty Street Chambers have been subjected to rape and death threats and harassment.
Jimmy Lai has been arbitrarily detained by the Hong Kong authorities on several occasions, including for 13 months for simply lighting a candle and saying a prayer at a vigil commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. He is currently on trial under Hong Kong's draconian NSL, imposed by Beijing in 2020, and could face life imprisonment.
The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has ruled that both Jimmy Lai and Chow Hang-tung are human rights defenders who have been arbitrarily detained and should be immediately released. Last week, 22 former political prisoners, hostages, and their relatives sent an open letter to the British prime minister Keir Starmer urging him to act to secure Jimmy Lai's release. Fortify Rights' Senior Director Benedict Rogers attended the press conference at which several of the signatories released the letter.
The Safeguarding National Security Regulation may result in further violations of human rights, in addition to the violations of the rights to freedom of expression, association, assembly and other freedoms already perpetrated under the 2020 NSL and the 2024 Safeguarding National Security Ordinance. If the Chinese authorities prosecute, convict and imprison Hong Kong national security cases in mainland China, the right of defendants to fair trial, and to freedom from arbitrary arrest or disappearance, torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, forced labor, as set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), will be significantly undermined. Although China is not a party to the ICCPR, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region's Basic Law and Bill of Rights incorporate the ICCPR into Hong Kong law and therefore these new regulations violate Hong Kong's obligations under its own domestic law and international law.
'There is a grave risk that Jimmy Lai could die in jail,' said Benedict Rogers. 'The international community, particularly the United Kingdom, has a responsibility to act urgently to secure his release. We urge world leaders to increase pressure on China to free Jimmy Lai, and to spell out the consequences for the authorities in Beijing and Hong Kong if they refuse to do so.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
12 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
New exhibition honours influential leader
An exhibition on a 19th-century Kāi Tahu leader is an opportunity to honour a man who contributed to the rich history of Ōtepoti and Ōtākou, organisers say. Rakatira [leader] and politician Hōri Kerei (H.K.) Taiaroa, who died on this day 120 years ago, is the subject of a Dunedin Public Art Galley exhibition, combining archive materials and taonga tuku iho [heirlooms] with new and existing contemporary art. Riki Te Mairaki Ellison Taiaroa Whānau Trust chairwoman Michelle Taiaroa said H.K. Taiaroa, also known as Huriwhenua, was a significant part of New Zealand's history during a period of time which shaped the country. "Just as significant is the magnificence of the man, in terms of his intellect, in terms of his selfless service," she said. H.K. Taiaroa was likely born at Ōtākou in the 1830s and was known for his tireless efforts as a Southern Māori Member of Parliament and on the Legislative Council. He was regarded as the godfather of Te Kerēme (the Ngāi Tahu Claim) and his records were key to settlement in 1998. Ms Taiaroa (Kāi Tahu, Kāti Māmoe, Waitaha) was a descendant of H.K Taiaroa and said he was a prolific writer — his personal writings displayed in the exhibition included political speeches, records of iwi politics and his thoughts on an archaeological site near Lake Ellesmere. He advocated for the borough council of the day to fund road works towards Taiaroa Head — "I think 'oh good God, we're still fighting to get one corner [of the road] funded," Ms Taiaroa said. "In a great sense we have come a long way, and in another sense, we're still having the same arguments around basic life-force stuff, water, environment. "Without these things, we don't exist well." She hoped the exhibition could show the wider community Dunedin's history went beyond being simply a Scottish city. "The tapestry's deeper than what we have — in a good way." The exhibition was a collaboration between the trust, Dunedin Public Art Galley and Te Rūnaka o Ōtākou. Ōtākou upoko Edward Ellison (Kai Tahu) said the exhibition was in honour of H.K Taiaroa's work to bring justice to his people. "Back then, it must have been a lonely, often, experience — we think it's important here for the city, in Dunedin, in the region, to have the opportunity to learn and understand." Since the claim settlement, the rūnaka had opportunity to use stories and art — such as the exhibit on H.K. Taiaroa — to bring "our history, our people to life again in the region", Mr Ellison said. "It builds that pathway and I think it will hopefully be stronger for our future generations in the future to stand tall." — "H.K. Taiaroa: 'Kua marara hoki ngā mana o tōna kaha ki runga i te katoa"' runs from today until November 23 at the Dunedin Public Art Gallery.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Scoop
India: End Unlawful Expulsion Of Indian Muslim Citizens And Rohingya Refugees
(Dhaka, July 31, 2025)—The Indian Government must immediately end its unlawful campaign of expulsion against Indian Muslim citizens and Rohingya refugees, said Fortify Rights today. Indian authorities have intensified their 'illegal immigrant' verification campaign in recent months, arbitrarily arresting, detaining, torturing, and coercively removing members of its Muslim minorities—including those with valid documentation or citizenship—as well as Rohingya refugees, in violation of India's international human rights obligations. 'India is targeting its Muslim citizens and refugees with a discriminatory campaign of arrest, detention, and forced expulsion in violation of their rights,' said John Quinley, Director at Fortify Rights. 'These actions not only violate international human rights law, but deepen the dangerous marginalization of Muslims and refugees in India.' Muslim communities and refugees in India are increasingly at risk since the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, was first elected in 2014. Fortify Rights' new investigation finds that in recent months, authorities in BJP-run states have arbitrarily arrested, detained, tortured, and coercively expelled Muslim minorities and Rohingya refugees. These efforts intensified in recent months, after deadly attacks in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, which Indian authorities alleged were linked to Pakistan-based militant groups. In response, on May 7, 2025, India launched Operation Sindoor, a retaliatory military campaign targeting alleged terrorist camps within Pakistan. Following the terror attack, BJP leaders and lawmakers have renewed their calls for stricter measures against what they termed 'infiltrators' and 'illegal immigrants' on Indian soil. Advertisement - scroll to continue reading In May 2025, India's Ministry of Home Affairs issued a directive mandating all states and union territories to verify the credentials of individuals suspected to be 'illegal immigrants' within 30 days. The directive was sent to India's Border Security Force (BSF) and Assam Rifles, which guard the country's borders with Bangladesh and Myanmar. Since this directive was issued, Indian authorities have conducted mass raids, forcibly returned Rohingya refugees and expelled Indian Muslims, to Myanmar and Bangladesh. According to Bangladeshi government data, since May 7, more than 1,800 people have been forced into Bangladesh from India. Indian officials reported that more than 2,000 have been sent to Bangladesh since May 7, 2025. From May to July 2025, Fortify Rights spoke with 16 individuals, including Muslim residents in the states of Assam and Gujarat, Rohingya refugees in India, relatives of detainees, as well as an Indian lawyer and a Bangladesh police officer at the border. Fortify Rights also documented torture and ill-treatment during India's arrest and expulsion campaign. An Indian Muslim citizen, 30, in Gujarat State, but originally from the state of West Bengal, told Fortify Rights how the Indian police detained and later expelled him to Bangladesh in May 2025, where he now remains: 'The police told us, 'Acknowledge that you are from Bangladesh, you are Bangladeshi. [Or] we will kill you.' … For 15 to 20 days, they kept us in an Indian jail.' Indian police demanded he convert to Hinduism if he wanted to remain in India: They [the police] said, 'If you convert to become a Hindu, we will release you. Then I said, 'No, I don't want to change my faith. If I have to die, I will die.' … They [the police] said, 'We will send you to Pakistan, you are all extremists.' ... From the prison, they took us to an airplane, we were blindfolded, and our hands were tied. They onboarded us, and [after the flight] they took us on a vessel. On the ship, they tortured us very brutally. … I have never been to Bangladesh; this is my first time in this country. I don't have any relatives in Bangladesh. … I want to return to India. … They sent me to Bangladesh forcefully. The man remains in Bangladesh and is unable to return to India. In Assam State, the state government is revising the National Register of Citizens (NRC) campaign to identify and expel 'illegal immigrants,' many of whom have families who have lived in the country for generations. Another Indian Muslim, 50, told Fortify Rights about being detained at Matia Transit Camp, India's largest detention facility for irregular migrants and refugees, in Assam's Goalpara District, and days later, being forcibly expelled to Bangladesh, saying: On May 23 [2025], I was asked to report to the Mikirbheta police station at 11 p.m. As soon as I arrived at the police station, I was detained. … I kept screaming that I was born and raised in India, that I am a government teacher, and that I had already served time in a detention camp for two years from 2018 to 2020. I spent at least a couple of days in the [Matia] Transit Camp before I was taken to a military camp of the BSF [Border Security Force]. … On the night of May 26, we were driven overnight with the BSF through the jungle and waterways, and were left in no man's land [on the India and Bangladesh border]. … I was in a group of 14 people pushed back … My hands were tied, and I was blindfolded. The man continued: 'The BSF fired rubber bullets at us while we were in no man's land just to force us to the other side [in Bangladesh]. I never thought that I would be made a foreigner in my own country.' Four days later, with support from his relatives in India, the man negotiated with the Indian authorities to be allowed back into Assam State because of a pending petition to the Supreme Court filed in December 2024 related to his family's citizenship. The court case is still pending. An Indian lawyer representing the family told Fortify Rights: 'Their family has a history going back at least a hundred years to colonial Assam. They have documents [proving their residence in Assam] from the 1900s, and Bangladesh was created in 1971.' Another Indian Muslim resident of Assam State told Fortify Rights how her father was taken into Indian police custody and later forced into Bangladesh on May 23, 2025. She said: My father was called a Bangladeshi all his life, but that he would be sent to Bangladesh was unimaginable. We are Indians. … We are being thrown out of our country. Why was my father sent to Bangladesh when he had all the documents [proving his Indian citizenship]? The woman's father was then intercepted by Bangladesh border guard forces and sent back again to India. Her grandmother, father, aunt, and other relatives had been declared ' bidexi' or 'foreigners' by a Foreigners Tribunal in Assam State, a quasi-judicial body, in 2011 and 2012. Others who were expelled were reportedly transported to coastal areas and forced into the water near the maritime border of Bangladesh. A Bangladeshi police officer, who received a group of more than 70 people pushed by Indian authorities into Bangladesh, told Fortify Rights: 'On the night of May 8, 2025, speedboats pushed them into the sea and forced them to swim ashore.' Rohingya refugees are also being detained and sent to Bangladesh, as part of India's campaign against 'illegal immigrants.' On May 6, 2025, authorities arrested scores of Rohingya, including both Muslim and Christian refugees, during coordinated raids in New Delhi under the pretext of a refugee biometric verification exercise, detaining men, women, and children, and later forcibly returning dozens to Myanmar, where they face an ongoing genocide. Around the same time in May, Indian authorities forcibly transferred at least 150 Rohingya refugees to Bangladesh. A 29-year-old Rohingya refugee and U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) cardholder, told Fortify Rights: 'We were put into vehicles and, in the middle of the night, taken to the border by the BSF [Border Security Force],' he said. '[They] told us, 'Now go straight into Bangladesh. Do not come back. If you return, we will shoot you dead.'' The man is now in the Cox's Bazar refugee camps in Bangladesh. The authorities continue to harass and routinely threaten other Rohingya refugees with forcible returns. A 23-year-old Rohingya refugee told Fortify Rights that police arrested and beat him on the street on May 8, 2025, falsely labelling him a Pakistani despite possessing a valid UNHCR refugee card. They also invited passing civilians to join the beatings. He told Fortify Rights, 'The police said, 'He's a Pakistani, if you want to beat him with us.' … So when the locals heard that I am Pakistani [and joined the beatings] … They were beating me continuously.' While in custody, officers stripped the man naked, beat the soles of his feet, and forced him to jump on his bruised and injured feet. 'You deserve to be under our feet … since you are not Indian,' they told him. Authorities later processed him for deportation, but ultimately released him due to a lawyer's intervention. In a separate incident, a 37-year-old Rohingya refugee was arrested by police officers on June 26 in New Delhi and brought to the police station, where officers forced him to write a confession. 'One of the police officers gave me a blank white paper. He told me, 'You write there, your story—that you came to India illegally, we detained you, and we will deport you. You sign there,'' he told Fortify Rights. He was released the same day due to his impending resettlement to a third country. A Bangladesh Foreign Ministry official told the media that Dhaka had raised the issue with New Delhi multiple times, "We've asked India to follow proper procedures, but have yet to receive a response. Meanwhile, the push-ins continue,' he said. In December 2019, the Modi administration passed the discriminatory Citizenship (Amendment) Act. Under the act, for the first time in India, religion is a basis for granting citizenship. Furthermore, Indian officials rely on the Foreigners Act of 1946, which grants sweeping powers to detain and remove any non-citizen deemed a 'foreigner.' The Citizenship Act (1955), Section 2(b), defines an 'illegal migrant' as a person who enters India without valid documents or overstays a visa. In 2019, U.N. experts specifically expressed concern over the implementation of the NRC in Assam State and 'its potentially far-reaching consequences for millions of people, in particular persons belonging to minorities who risk statelessness, deportation or prolonged detention.' Customary international law, which reflects widespread and consistent state practice and is legally binding on all states, obliges the Indian government and, by extension, Indian state-level authorities to protect Indian citizens from expulsion, prevent statelessness, and ensure that refugees are not forcibly returned to situations where they may face harm or persecution. Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which India is a signatory, states that: 'Everyone has a right to a nationality; No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality.' The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which India is a state party, prohibits discrimination before the law 'on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.' India is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention nor its 1967 Protocol and lacks a domestic law protecting refugees; however, it remains obligated to respect the international customary law principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits the forced return of Rohingya refugees to situations where they will face persecution and other serious human rights abuses.. 'India is stripping Indian Muslim citizens and Rohingya refugees of their rights,' said John Quinley. 'Despite its obligations under international law, India continues to violate these commitments through a series of disturbing official laws and policies tinged with ethno-religious supremacism.'
Scoop
24-07-2025
- Scoop
U.S. Court Agrees Trump Administration's ICC Sanctions Likely Violate First Amendment Rights Of Fortify Rights CEO
(Bangkok, July 23, 2025)—A U.S. federal court last week granted a preliminary injunction in Smith v. Trump, a lawsuit brought by Fortify Rights CEO Matthew Smith and human rights advocate Akila Radhakrishnan challenging the Trump administration's executive order imposing sanctions on officials of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and banning advocates from communicating with the ICC under threat of criminal prosecution. The court issued the order on July 17 and concluded that the advocates were likely to succeed on their claim that the speech restrictions imposed on them by the executive order violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects the right to freedom of speech. The preliminary injunction prohibits the administration from punishing the two advocates for their work related to the ICC while the litigation is pending. 'I'm grateful the court recognized the serious threat this executive order against the ICC poses to fundamental freedoms and to our ability to pursue accountability for mass atrocity crimes,' said Matthew Smith. 'This case is not only about our rights — it's about safeguarding the space for all human rights defenders to advocate for justice, speak truth to power, and demand international accountability without fear of reprisal.' Both Smith and Radhakrishnan are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)—a leading American organization that defends and promotes individual rights and liberties guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. As the lawsuit explains, the sanctions violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by prohibiting Smith, Radhakrishnan, and other Americans like them from speaking with the ICC's Office of the Prosecutor, including by providing legal advice, expert analysis, and evidence. 'Preventing our clients and others like them from doing critical human rights work with the ICC is unconstitutional, and we're heartened that the court saw that as well,' said Charlie Hogle, staff attorney with the ACLU's National Security Project. 'The First Amendment does not allow the government to impose sweeping limits on what Americans can say and who they can say it to.' Under the executive order, people in the U.S. who have devoted their lives to seeking justice for the victims of atrocities — like the genocide of Myanmar's Rohingya people, or gender-based violence committed against Afghan women under the Taliban — could face stiff penalties simply for exercising their constitutional right to engage and advocate with ICC investigators and prosecutors. The international community, including the United States, established the ICC in 1998 to help maintain international peace and security. The ICC investigates and prosecutes crimes of the severest magnitude — including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes — when domestic courts are unwilling or unable to do so. Today, 125 countries have joined the ICC's founding treaty, known as the Rome Statute. As the lawsuit explains, although the United States has not ratified the Rome Statute, it has supported the ICC's critical work on a wide range of matters. 'Fighting this order isn't only a defense of the work I do, or the court itself,' wrote Matthew Smith in an op-ed published June 6 in the New York Times. 'It's also a statement about what kind of country we want to be.' On Friday last week, the New York Times referred to the court's decision to grant a preliminary injunction 'a striking, if tentative, blow to the president's efforts to penalize and isolate the world's highest criminal court.' For more information about the lawsuit, please see the ACLU's webpage devoted to Smith v. Trump.
