Article 23: Hong Kong Enacts Strict Security Law Rejected by Protesters for Years

Hong Kong has enacted a stringent security law aimed at maintaining stability, though critics worry it will worsen the erosion of civil liberties. 

Article 23 introduces new offenses such as external interference and insurrection, carrying penalties such as life imprisonment.

The law was rapidly approved by the city's pro-Beijing parliament in under two weeks. Article 23 builds upon a previous controversial national security law imposed by China, which criminalizes actions such as secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion with foreign entities in Hong Kong.

But Hong Kong's leader John Lee has said Article 23 is also necessary to guard against "potential sabotage and undercurrents that try to create troubles", particularly "ideas of an independent Hong Kong". He hailed its passing as "a historic moment Hong Kong people have been waiting for over 26 years".

China's Vice-Premier Ding Xuexiang previously emphasized that the swift implementation of the new legislation would safeguard "core national interests" and enable Hong Kong to prioritize economic development.

Regarding Hong Kong's Article 23:

Since its enactment in 2020, numerous individuals have been detained under the NSL, leading to concerns about a climate of fear. Sarah Brooks, China director at Amnesty International, described the new law as dealing another severe blow to human rights in the city. Maya Wang, acting China director at Human Rights Watch, warned that it would lead Hong Kong into a new era of authoritarianism.

"Now even possessing a book critical of the Chinese government can violate national security and mean years in prison in Hong Kong," she said, calling on the government to repeal it immediately.

The law has also been criticised by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk - who called it "a regressive step" - and the UK's Foreign Secretary David Cameron, who said it would "further damage rights and freedoms" in the former British colony.

Hongkongers have also voiced concerns over Article 23, particularly over the use of broad and vague definitions in the legislation.

Civil servant George told the BBC he was most concerned about its definition of "state secrets".

"Let's say a group of colleagues go out to lunch and discuss how to handle some work matters. Will it constitute leaking a state secret? Will we be arrested if someone eavesdrops and spreads the information?" he said.

"I am very afraid that we can be accused [of the offence] easily."

George said he had observed an "informant culture" among his colleagues since the earlier law came into force. He estimates that about one-fifth of the employees in his department have resigned in the past three years, with many of them moving overseas.

"I won't talk so much about work with friends any more. Just focus on eating, drinking and having fun," George said.

Corporate consultant Liz has similar concerns over the new "external interference" offence, which include receiving financial support or direction from foreign governments, political organisations or individuals, among other "external forces".

"The definition of 'international organisations' is very broad. Aren't foreign investment banks and businesses international organisations?"

Liz, who has moved to Singapore, is worried that she would be put at risk of being prosecuted whenever her company publishes research reports with her name on them.

Walter, who works at a Western consulate in Hong Kong, said he is more concerned that Hong Kong would lose its competitive edge than for his personal safety.

"It will become even easier to accuse people of 'colluding with external forces'," he said.

Fewer people will want to be associated with so-called "external forces" and it will become more challenging for Hong Kong to continue taking on the role of the "super connector" between China and the rest of the world.

"How could such a complicated law be passed so briskly and no time was given for public discussion?" he questioned.

Article 23 has been a longstanding consideration for authorities. According to Hong Kong's mini-constitution, the Basic Law, the region was required to establish its own security legislation. 

However, a previous effort in 2003 faced significant public protests, leading to its delay. This year, the bill was reintroduced in early March after a month-long consultation period, and lawmakers swiftly reviewed it. In contrast, the 2003 attempt included a three-month consultation period.