Hong Kong imposes new measures on overseas-based activists
The organisation is not the city's official legislature and its influence is limited.
Three of the original 19 activists were already targeted by similar measures last year.
Secretary for Security Chris Tang banned providing funds or economic resources to the 16 activists, including Victor Ho, Keung Ka-wai, Australian academic Chongyi Feng and US citizen Gong Sasha, the Hong Kong government said in a statement.
Travel documents were cancelled for 12 of the 16 who hold Hong Kong passports.
The government also prohibited properties from being leased to the people on the list or forming joint ventures with them.
Anyone violating the orders risks a penalty of up to seven years in prison.
The 16 activists are hiding in the UK, the US, Canada, Germany, Australia, Thailand and Taiwan, among other regions, the government said, accusing them of continuing to engage in activities endangering national security.
The notice also accused them of intending to incite hatred against Beijing and Hong Kong through smear and slander.
'We therefore have taken such measures to make a significant impact,' the statement said.
Beijing imposed a national security law on the territory in 2020 that has effectively wiped out most public dissent following huge anti-government protests in 2019.
Many activists were arrested, silenced or forced into self-exile.
The measures announced Monday were issued under the powers granted by Hong Kong's homegrown national security law enacted last year.
The arrest warrants issued in July have drawn criticism from foreign governments, including the US, the UK and the European Union.
Police offered rewards of 200,000 Hong Kong dollars (£19,178) to one million Hong Kong dollars (£95,889) for information leading to their arrests.
In a July statement, US secretary of state Marco Rubio condemned the moves.
'The extraterritorial targeting of Hong Kongers who are exercising their fundamental freedoms is a form of transnational repression,' he said.
'We will not tolerate the Hong Kong government's attempts to apply its national security laws to silence or intimidate Americans or anyone on US soil.'
The Hong Kong office of the Chinese foreign ministry responded by opposing criticism from foreign politicians, insisting the actions were legitimate.
The governments in Beijing and Hong Kong said the security laws were necessary for the city's stability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer hails major UK-France deal to tackle Channel small boat crossings
The 'one-in, one-out' pilot scheme could see some adult migrants who make the Channel crossing at risk of return if their claim for asylum is considered inadmissible A major treaty between the UK and France attempting to tackle dangerous Channel crossings is set to come into force tomorrow. The"one-in, one-out" pilot scheme could see some adult migrants who make the crossing at risk of return if their claim for asylum is considered inadmissible. In exchange, people with a legitimate claim to live in Britain will be sent in their place under the treaty, which remains in force until June 2026. Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron reached the agreement last month during the French President's state visit to the UK. It was agreed the scheme would begin as a pilot and is the first returns deal struck with France since Britain left the European Union. It comes after Nigel Farage appearances on Sky News sparked thousands of complaints. Keir Starmer said: 'This government has been fixing the foundations of the broken asylum system we inherited and today we send a clear message – if you come here illegally on a small boat you will face being sent back to France. 'This is the product of months of grown-up diplomacy delivering real results for British people as we broker deals no government has been able to achieve and strike at the heart of these vile gangs' business model. 'The days of gimmicks and broken promises are over – we will restore order to our borders with the seriousness and competence the British people deserve.' Ministers have previously declined to say how many migrants could be returned. But reports have suggested the pilot will be capped at 50 a week - around 2,600 each year. The Home Office said ratification of the treaty comes after Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and French Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau signed the final text last week. They said the EU Commission had also given the green-light to the scheme, which Ms Cooper described as "groundbreaking". She said under the deal "people who undertake illegal, dangerous journeys to the UK – putting lives at risk and fuelling organised crime – can be returned to France". She added: "In return, we will take people who apply legally with appropriate documentation to be transferred to the UK, subject to clear eligibility criteria and stringent security checks. 'This is an important step towards undermining the business model of the organised crime gangs that are behind these crossings – undermining their claims that those who travel to the UK illegally can't be returned to France." 'It is also right to make clear that – while the UK will always be ready to play its part alongside other countries in helping those fleeing persecution and conflict – this must be done in a controlled and managed legal way, not through dangerous, illegal, and uncontrolled routes." On Monday the Home Office also announced a £100million boost to border security to pay for up to 300 additional National Crime Agency Officers. The cash will also fund a pilot of the 'one-in, one-out' returns deal with France.
Daily Mirror
2 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Russia warns US 'be very careful' in chilling response to Trump's nuclear move
Donald Trump last week ordered the 'repositioning' of US nuclear submarines in response to former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's 'highly provocative' social media comments Russia has urged caution following Donald Trump's recent statement ordering the 'repositioning' of US nuclear submarines. The US president last Friday demanded that two submarines should be "positioned in the appropriate regions". Trump's move was a response to what he deemed "highly provocative" comments on social media by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev concerning the risk of war between the nuclear-armed adversaries. However, the Kremlin today played down the significance of the US leader's remarks, adding that it didn't want to get into a public argument with him. It comes after Putin warns of nuclear war after unleashing another night of hell on Ukraine. READ MORE: Donald Trump accused of 'throwing shade' at Prince Harry and Meghan with cryptic quip Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov indicated that the US should be "very careful" when talking about nuclear capabilities. ' Russia is very cautious about nuclear nonproliferation matters, and we believe everyone should be very careful about nuclear rhetoric,' he said. In addition, the Russia Foreign Ministry today issued a statement 'on the moratorium on the deployment of ground-based-intermediate-range [INF] and short-range-missiles'. In 2019, the US formally withdrew from the INF treaty - an arms control pact - which had been in place between the Americans and Russia since 1987. However, the Kremlin has now accused the 'US and its allies' of building a collection of 'destabilising' INF missiles in 'regions adjacent to the Russian Federation'. The statement added that this creates, 'a direct threat to the security of our country, and of a strategic nature. 'In general, such a development of events carries a serious negative charge and significant harmful consequences for regional and global stability, including a dangerous escalation of tensions between nuclear powers.' It went on, saying that 'the Russian Foreign Ministry notes the disappearance of the conditions for maintaining a unilateral moratorium on the deployment of similar weapons and is authorised to declare that the Russian Federation no longer considers itself bound by the corresponding previously adopted self-restrictions.' The Kremlin finished by saying that any 'response measures' would be made by the Russia's 'leadership' based on the, 'scale of deployment of American and other Western land-based intermediate-range missiles, as well as the general development of the situation in the area of international security and strategic stability.' However, despite the Kremlin's press release regarding the moratorium Peskov said that Russia did not see Trump's recent statement as an escalation in any nuclear tension between the two countries. He said: "We do not believe that we are talking about any escalation now. It is clear that very complex, very sensitive issues are being discussed, which, of course, are perceived very emotionally by many people." Peskov went on to seemingly distance Putin from Medvedev, a longtime prime minister under him who is now the deputy chairman of the national Security Council. He said: "On the whole, certainly, we absolutely wouldn't like to engage in such polemics, nor would we like to comment on that in any way," before adding: 'There can be no winner in a nuclear war."
Reuters
4 hours ago
- Reuters
Oil producer pressure, Trump rollbacks threaten global treaty on plastics pollution
GENEVA, Aug 4 (Reuters) - Hopes for a "last-chance" ambitious global treaty to curb plastic pollution have dimmed as delegates gather this week at the United Nations in Geneva for what was intended to be the final round of negotiations. Diplomats and climate advocates warn that efforts by the European Union and small island states to cap virgin plastic production - fuelled by petroleum, coal and gas - are threatened by opposition from petrochemical-producing countries and the U.S. administration of President Donald Trump. Plastic production is set to triple by 2060 without intervention, choking oceans, harming human health and accelerating climate change, according to the OECD. "This is really our last best chance. As pollution grows, it deepens the burden for those who are least responsible and least able to adapt," said Ilana Seid, permanent representative of Palau and chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS). Delegates will meet officially from Tuesday for the sixth round of talks, after a meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) in South Korea late last year ended without a path forward on capping plastic pollution. The most divisive issues include capping production, managing plastic products and chemicals of concern, and financing to help developing countries implement the treaty. Delegates told Reuters that oil states, including Saudi Arabia and Russia, plan to challenge key treaty provisions and push for voluntary or national measures, hindering progress toward a legally binding agreement to tackle the root cause of plastic pollution. Government spokespeople for Saudi Arabia and Russia were not immediately available for comment. Andres Del Castillo, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), a non-profit providing legal counsel to some countries attending the talks, said oil states were questioning even basic facts about the harm to health caused by plastics. "We are in a moment of revisionism, where even science is highly politicized," he said. The U.S. State Department told Reuters it will lead a delegation supporting a treaty on reducing plastic pollution that doesn't impose burdensome restrictions on producers that could hinder U.S. companies. A source familiar with the talks said the U.S. seeks to limit the treaty's scope to downstream issues like waste disposal, recycling and product design. It comes as the Trump administration rolls back environmental policies, including a longstanding finding on greenhouse gas emissions endangering health. Over 1,000 delegates, including scientists and petrochemical lobbyists, will attend the talks, raising concerns among proponents of an ambitious agreement that industry influence may create a watered-down deal focused on waste management, instead of production limits. The petrochemical industry said it continues to support a global treaty and has been urging the U.S. administration and Congress to "lean in" in negotiations. Stewart Harris, spokesperson for the International Council of Chemical Associations, said the U.S. in particular has an opportunity "not just at the negotiating table, but really on the implementation of the agreement" to promote the use of new technologies in mechanical recycling and advanced recycling, which turns plastic waste into fuels, plastics and other products, globally. Republican and Democratic U.S. lawmakers sent separate letters to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday pushing for divergent approaches. A group of House of Representatives Republicans led by Representative Dan Crenshaw of Texas urged the U.S. delegation to push for a treaty that focuses on expanding recycling technology, while a group of Senate Democrats led by Senator Jeff Merkely of Oregon pushed for a deal that includes plastic production caps. Two-thirds of the Senate is needed to ratify a treaty. Small island states are particularly impacted by plastic waste washing ashore, threatening their fishing and tourism economies. They stress an urgent need for dedicated international funding to clean up existing pollution. "Plastics are a concern for human health because (plastic) contains about 16,000 chemicals, and a quarter of these are known to be hazardous to human health," said Dr. Melanie Bergmann of the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany. Jodie Roussell, global public affairs lead at food giant Nestle (NESN.S), opens new tab and a member of a 300-company coalition backing a treaty to reduce plastic pollution, told Reuters that harmonizing international regulations on packaging reduction and sustainable material use would be the most cost-effective approach. French politician Philippe Bolo, a member of the global Interparliamentary Coalition to End Plastic Pollution, said that a weak, watered-down treaty that focuses on waste management must be avoided. Bolo and a diplomatic source from a country attending the talks said the potential of a vote or even a breakaway agreement among more ambitious countries could be explored, as a last resort. Inger Andersen, executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme, however, said countries should push for a meaningful pact agreed by consensus. "We're not here to get something meaningless... you would want something that is effective, that has everybody inside, and therefore everybody committed to it," she said.
