'As Beijing’s noose tightens around Hong Kong, Britain must step up', Benedict Rogers

On Saturday, when a new draconian security law took effect in Hong Kong, the final nails were hammered in as the coffin of Hong Kong’s freedoms, the rule of law and autonomy was lowered into its grave.

That coffin was constructed four years ago, when Beijing imposed a repressive National Security Law on the city, but it was completed when Hong Kong’s pro-Beijing puppet legislature unanimously passed an additional security law last week.

The burial of Hong Kong’s freedoms is not a reason to give up. On the contrary, it is why those of us who have freedom must speak out more than ever for the people of Hong Kong whose basic rights have been so cruelly stripped away. As the Easter story which Christians celebrate next Sunday illustrates, graves can burst open and resurrections can happen. So don’t write off Hong Kongers.

But Hong Kong has entered its darkest days yet. As the new Safeguarding National Security Law, colloquially referred to as Article 23, was fast-tracked through the legislature, with minimum scrutiny, precious little debate and North Korea-style unanimous approval, the last fragments of freedom have been swept away, completing the transformation of what was once one of Asia’s most open cities into one of its most repressive police states.

Since the imposition of the National Security Law four years ago, Hong Kong’s freedoms have already been almost completely dismantled, with the forced closure of independent media, dissolution of over 66 civil society organisations, an end to freedom of protest, erosion of academic and religious freedom and the expulsion of democrats from the legislature.

Before 2020, I was in almost daily contact with dozens of people in Hong Kong. Today, I am not in touch with anyone in the city which I was proud to call home for five years and where I began my working life. Most of my friends still in Hong Kong are in jail or have been forced into silence. Many others have been driven into exile.

Even those in exile face dangers. Last year 13 exiled Hong Kong activists, six of whom are in the UK, were threatened with arrest warrants and bounties of over HK$1 million, and their families in Hong Kong were called in for questioning.

There are fears that the new law will lead to increased transnational repression. As David Lammy, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, said during an Urgent Question in Parliament last week, the Government must address this urgently, to give those who fled repression a sense of security here.

In Hong Kong today, fear and lies prevail. And the new law points a dagger at the heart of the rule of law.

It could deny arrestees access to a lawyer, and permit detention without charge for up to seven days. It outlines 39 new crimes, and provides for lengthy jail sentences. Anyone convicted of seditious intent could be jailed for seven years; a person found guilty of colluding with a foreign force could face ten years; and possessing a seditious publication could land a person in jail for three years.

The vaguely-defined crime of “espionage” carries a 20 year sentence; “treason” is punished by life imprisonment; and anyone “failing to disclose the commission of treason by others” could face 14 years in jail.

Like the National Security Law, this new legislation carries extraterritorial application, stating that all offences apply to “anyone” outside Hong Kong. I am violating this absurd law every day, and so are other campaigners, journalists, and politicians who criticise the CCP. Writing this article is a crime.

In the most high-profile trial underway – that of 76 year-old entrepreneur and British citizen Jimmy Lai, founder of the Apple Daily newspaper – I have been named as a “collaborator”, along with several other foreign nationals.

Perfectly normal WhatsApp messages between Lai and myself, pre-dating the National Security Law, have been presented in evidence. One was a message he sent in 2019 requesting me to ask Lord Patten, the last governor of Hong Kong, to provide a comment to an Apple Daily reporter – hardly an unusual act by a newspaper publisher.

More importantly, a key prosecution witness is Andy Li, a young activist whose evidence has been ruled inadmissible by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture because it has been coerced through torture.

The Foreign Secretary has met with Lai’s son Sebastien; the UK highlighted his case in the United Nations Universal Periodic Review; and Lord Cameron has issued two statements about the new law, both when it was proposed and when it was passed. No fewer than 88 international parliamentarians and public figures, including Lord Patten, have condemned the new law.

Yet much more is needed. We must move beyond strong words and impose targeted sanctions on those responsible for tearing up treaty promises made to Hong Kong in the Sino-British Joint Declaration – starting with John Lee, Hong Kong’s Chief Executive.

Both Sir Iain Duncan Smith and Lord Alton raised key questions about sanctions last week: why the UK has not yet sanctioned those responsible, whether it is true that the UK has “paused” sanctions on China indefinitely, and if so – why?

Unless there are consequences for their disgraceful behaviour, the regime will be emboldened to intensify repression with impunity and further threaten our freedoms. They should have been sanctioned several years ago, but now they have crossed another red line there is no excuse for failure to ensure they pay a price for destroying Hong Kong.

There are other things we could also do.

The British Government deserves credit for the British National Overseas (BNO) scheme, which offers a lifeline to hundreds of thousands of Hong Kongers who need to flee Hong Kong. And it should be applauded for the extensions it made, to allow young Hong Kongers to apply.

But let’s close the gap and allow Hong Kongers born before 1997 and eligible for BNO status, but excluded because their parents did not avail themselves of it, to apply.

Let us encourage other countries to do more. Canada and Australia have schemes, but these could be extended, especially for former political prisoners. The European Union and the United States should offer Hong Kongers sanctuary in their darkest hour.

Let’s intensify pressure on pension providers to release hard-earned savings under the Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF) to Hong Kongers leaving the city. Currently those with BNO status are blocked from withdrawing their MPF savings, amounting to £2.2 billion. The UK government should hold the MPF providers, especially London-headquartered HSBC, accountable.

And let’s offer home fees for bright young BNOs to study in our universities, as recommended in a new report, instead of charging them exorbitant international fees. They are on a pathway to citizenship, and will make a substantial long-term contribution to society, so let’s treat them as citizens, not foreigners.

The noose has been tightened in Hong Kong. But that does not mean the flickering flame of hope has been extinguished. We must keep the spotlight on Hong Kong and its political prisoners. We must speak up, ensure accountability and justice and provide sanctuary – for as long as needed.

This article was published in Conservative Home on 25 March 2024.