The new Hong Kong National Security Law passed on June 30th by Beijing’s legislature has sparked fears that the island-city’s special political status may be in jeopardy. The law gives mainland authorities new powers over the territory. Under the new law, individuals who commit acts of “secession, subversion of state power, terrorist activities, and collusion with foreign forces” could face life imprisonment. State media outlets such as the China Global Times have claimed that the legislation does not endanger Hong Kong’s freedoms and will in contrast “protect Hong Kong democracy.” The law has received considerable international criticism, with western media outlets opining that the legislation is draconian and could ultimately compromise the “one country, two systems” political structure agreed to in the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, which stipulated that Hong Kong would be able to keep its own political and legal institutions for 50 years (until 2047).
In the United States, Washington has taken steps to end Hong Kong’s preferential trade status. In response, mainland authorities have condemned the move and threatened retaliatory sanctions on U.S. entities. There have been several arrests since the law came into effect. The security law has also prompted several notable opposition lawmakers to flee the country, among them student turned legislator Nathan Law. Law co-founded the opposition political party Demosisto with prominent activist Joshua Wong. Law left Hong Kong soon after Beijing implemented the legislation. Law fears that he could potentially be arrested and tried in court by PRC authorities. On June 30th, Wong announced that he had stepped down as the leader of Demosisto and that the party had been officially disbanded. Indeed, the Hong Kong political opposition will face stiff challenges as the new security law will likely discourage opposition political activity.
In the aftermath of the new law, hundreds of thousands of Hong Kong citizens participated in the opposition primaries despite the increased risk of being arrested. During the weekend of July 11th – 12th, voters showed up at more than 250 polling stations around the city to cast their ballots. City officials claimed that more than 500,000 people had voted by the end of Sunday afternoon. Approximately 610,000 people voted over the weekend, with over 590,000 votes cast via mobile app, and around 21,000 paper ballots. The massive turnout shattered opposition organizers’ initial target of 170,000. The vote will ultimately narrow down the list of opposition candidates for the Hong Kong Legislative Council elections that are to be held in September.
The significant turnout was in part due to an “emergency appeal” from Hong Kong’s traditional opposition parties, which faced stiff challenges from localist candidates. The localist faction favors a more confrontational approach to the new security law, while traditional opposition seeks to increase engagement and dialogue with the pro-Beijing elements of the Legislative Council. District councilor and opposition candidate Lester Shum asserted that the vote is ultimately a “battle of different approaches…It is a question of whether we should still allow moderate and appeasing traditional pan-democrats to make up the majority in the legislature.” Shum firmly believes that moderation and appeasement is no longer feasible as Beijing’s recent actions have shown that the mainland is already beginning to assert more control over the special administrative region. Indeed, the CCP’s actions over the past several years have put mounting pressure on the island-city’s relatively independent political and legal systems. The central government’s latest move could ultimately spell the end of Hong Kong’s special political status and effectively end “one country, two systems” in the territory. The primary is a litmus test of how the Hong Kong opposition wish to approach internal politics and deal with the Chinese Communist Party.
Following the weekend voting, the Chinese government issued a statement on July 13th asserting that more than 600,000 voters may have broken the new security law. Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam claimed that the opposition primary undermined the territory’s democracy, asserting that “people have to uphold their right to be able to cast a vote in an election which is open, fair and honest.” The Hong Kong Liaison Office claimed that the opposition primary is a “serious provocation to the current electoral system and caused serious damage to the fairness and justice of the Legislative Council elections.” The office also asserted that opposition politicians were attempting to incite a color revolution and seize the governance of Hong Kong. Beijing officials accused Benny Tai, a legal scholar and a one-time student leader of the 2014 Umbrella Movement, of openly manipulating the upcoming Legislative Council election. Officials suggested that Tai was colluding with unnamed entities to undermine Hong Kong’s political process. Under the new law, Tai could potentially face up to 10 years of imprisonment if he is found guilty of colluding with a foreign power. Chinese officials have suggested that any political candidates who criticize or campaign against the security law could be struck off the ballot for the upcoming elections. Despite the Liaison Office’s statement, it is unlikely that the CCP will seek broad punishment for all the individuals who participated in the primary over the weekend. Rather, it may select a few individuals to target, as evidenced by the Liaison Office explicitly naming Tai as a lead figure of the anti-government movement.
The National Security Law could result in drastic and fundamental changes to the territory’s internal politics. With numerous opposition political parties having disbanded and opposition candidates facing the threat of being left off the ballot should they engage in what the central government perceives to be collusion, political opposition may be hard-pressed to organize their activities on the ground. The broad scope of the security law and the vague definitions of collusion are particularly problematic and gives government authorities significant leeway in their interpretation of illegal political activity. Despite these new regulations and the threat of imprisonment, the fact that hundreds of thousands of opposition voters took to the polls over the weekend is indicative of their firm political resolve to voice their concerns regarding the new legislation. The opposition in Hong Kong faces a dilemma, as traditional opposition parties and their localist challengers advocate for two very distinct approaches to dealing with Beijing. While engagement and dialogue with pro-Beijing lawmakers (the traditionalist approach) could help create a more conducive atmosphere for incremental political change, recent actions by the central government in enacting the security law may serve to suggest that a more assertive opposition stance is needed to preserve Hong Kong’s sociopolitical system. On the other hand, while the localists’ advocacy for a more assertive approach could induce concessions from Beijing, there is also the possibility that the CCP will respond with even more stringent measures to punish dissenters, risking further erosion of Hong Kong’s unique political status.
Enter the text or HTML code here
