HONG KONG – Life in Hong Kong appears unchanged on the surface after the implementation of a new national security law. Unlike the 2020 security law, which sparked widespread protests, the recent law has not resulted in any high-profile arrests or newsroom raids. However, beneath the surface, there is a subtle and quiet wave of adaptation among the city’s residents who are now living under the threat of more extensive restrictions.
The law, known locally as Article 23, took effect on March 23 and has prompted many Hong Kong residents to consider emigration as a means of safeguarding their freedoms. Immigration consultant Ben Li reported a 40% increase in inquiries about moving abroad, with more than half of those citing the new law as a reason. This wave of emigration reflects the growing concern among residents about the implications of the law on their personal freedoms.
China promised to maintain Hong Kong’s autonomy and way of life for 50 years after the city was handed over from Britain in 1997. However, since the 2020 law was imposed, civil liberties such as free speech and press freedom have been significantly curtailed. Pro-democracy activists have been arrested or forced into exile, civil society groups have been disbanded, and outspoken media outlets have been shut down. As a result, many disillusioned professionals and middle-class families have chosen to emigrate to other countries.
The new national security law was mandated by Hong Kong’s Basic Law, or constitution. It aims to prevent a recurrence of the 2019 protests and claims to strike a balance between national security and safeguarding freedoms. However, with its wide-ranging provisions and severe penalties, such as life imprisonment for acts of treason and insurrection, many residents fear falling afoul of the law.
In response to the law, some individuals and businesses are taking precautionary measures. An independent bookstore owner, fearing accusations of distributing seditious publications, removed politically sensitive books from the shelves. The bookseller expressed disappointment at the infringement on freedom of speech caused by the law. The law also has implications for the media, with the closure of Radio Free Asia’s Hong Kong bureau and increased scrutiny on journalists reporting sensitive stories.
The business and legal communities are also making adjustments due to the law. Some companies, including law firms, have restricted access to global databases for their Hong Kong staff, anticipating eventual alignment of Hong Kong’s data security policies with those of mainland China. Banks and technology companies have not yet made plans to leave Hong Kong, but some are considering moving certain sensitive roles elsewhere.
The law’s implementation has sparked concerns among residents and businesses, leading to a wave of emigration, self-censorship, and precautionary measures. While the law aims to maintain national security, its impact on personal freedoms and the city’s business environment is causing uncertainty and apprehension. Hong Kong residents are navigating these challenges by adopting coping strategies seen in mainland China, such as self-censorship and avoiding voicing opinions that might attract trouble.
As Hong Kong adjusts to the new security law, the hope remains that the city will continue to provide more space for dissent than mainland China. However, caution continues to rule as residents grapple with the changing landscape of their freedoms and the potential consequences of voicing dissent.