L
ast 1 March, the Hong Kong government lifted the mandatory mask requirement, ending what was arguably the longest mask mandate in the world. Yet while the government probably wants to demonstrate to the world that Hong Kong has returned to normalcy, many Hong Kong people likely feel that their city is far from what it was three years ago. Indeed, many of them lament the rapid changes in the city since the pandemic began, in particular the deterioration in human rights and freedom.
Back in early 2020, when the pandemic was just starting, people in Hong Kong could still access news articles and political commentary from Apple Daily, a popular pro-democracy tabloid. They could freely discuss political issues and express their anger toward the government. Many young people actively participated in independent unions and nongovernment organizations. Human rights groups could sharply criticize the police’s excessive use of force and other human rights violations, and communicate with international rights bodies such as UN Treaty Bodies without fear of reprisal.
Today these are no longer possible in Hong Kong, and among those who have been feeling the ever-tightening of screws in particular is the city’s civil society community.
Following the imposition of the draconian national security law by China on 1 July 2020, Hong Kong civil society has faced an unprecedented crackdown. The law, known by its acronym NSL, provides sweeping power to the Hong Kong government to suppress political dissidents, NGOs and media, and has led to the shutdown of Apple Daily and non-profit online news website Stand News. As of February 2023, at least 236 people have been arrested under the NSL, including 47 pro-democracy politicians and activists who have been charged with conspiracy to subvert state power and have been detained for more than two years before trial. At least 60 civil society organizations have disbanded under political pressure, including the city’s biggest single-industry union Hong Kong Professional Teachers’ Union and trade union coalition Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions, both of which played vital roles in the democratic movement for the past 30 years.
Faced with intense political pressure and prosecution risk, many civil society groups have had no choice but to try to learn how to survive and find room to maneuver in the shrinking civic space. But they may encounter yet another problem in the coming months. This 20 March, a three-month consultation ends regarding a new law regulating crowdfunding activities, requiring all crowdfunding organizers to register their activities with the government so as to censor any crowdfunding activities that could “endanger national security,” and criminalize “unauthorized fundraising, ” with penalties meted to both organizers and donors.
The proposed law even has an extraterritorial effect, which means that any organization or person, whether in or outside Hong Kong, launching a fundraising activity accepting contributions from and for Hongkongers will, irrespective of its objective, be subject to the regulation of the proposed legislation.
While the authorities are unlikely to scrutinize all the fundraising programs across the world, the proposed law may be used to inflict pressure on overseas Hongkongers community and NGOs that work on Hong Kong’s issues. A similar extraterritorial feature can be found in the national security law, which applies to national security offenses committed outside Hong Kong. In March 2022, the Hong Kong police sent a warning letter to the U.K.-based NGO Hong Kong Watch, accusing it of “seriously interfering in the affairs of the HKSAR and jeopardising national security of the People’s Republic of China.” Hence, it would come as no surprise if the Hong Kong government will do the same with the proposed law.
The Hong Kong government has not yet revealed the timetable for the legislative process. Given that there is no more opposition in the patriots-only Legislative Council, the proposed law can be passed and come into force rapidly, which will certainly be another sign of the dismantling of Hong Kong’s civil society.
Shrinking civic space worldwide
For sure, though, the targeting of civil society by authorities is neither new nor unique to Hong Kong – or the rest of China, for that matter. In 2014, the then UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein said at the 30th session of the UN Human Rights Council: “[F]or several years, I and my predecessor have enumerated at this Council States that have taken extremely serious steps to restrict or persecute the voices of civil society. While I will continue to list them, I am devastated to have to report that there are now too many countries on that list for me to name them here today.”
Sources: The Diplomat, Hong Kong Free Press, Catholic News Agency, Charlston Law
Today a civic-space monitoring map drawn up by the global civil-society alliance CIVICUS shows only a handful of countries it deems as having “open” civic space. In Asia, among those it considers “closed” are China, Vietnam, and Laos, while most of the rest of the countries in the region have “repressed” or “obstructed” civic spaces.
“Civil society organizations play an essential role in the promotion and protection of human rights,” said the rights group Amnesty International in a 2019 study. “(They) are a tool enabling individuals to work toward the elimination of human rights violations and hold those responsible to account. Enshrined in all leading human rights instruments, the right to freedom of association allows for individuals to form or join formal or informal groups to take collective action to pursue a common goal.”
But it noted in its study “Laws Designed to Silence: The Global Crackdown on Civil Society Organizations”: “(An) alarming global trend has surfaced over the last decade in which states are introducing and using laws to interfere with the right to freedom of association and to hamper the work of civil society organizations and individuals who participate in them. The pace is accelerating: in the last two years alone almost 40 pieces of legislation have been either put in place or are in the pipeline. Various provisions impose barriers at all stages of these organizations’ existence, and allow the authorities to closely monitor them. This happens particularly at the point of registration, but also when they plan, conduct and report on their activities, when they seek and receive funds, and when they carry out public campaigning and advocacy.”
Members of Hong Kong’s civil society now know this all too well. Besides the national security law, the Hong Kong government has weaponized other existing legislation to suppress civil society. For example, by using the Trade Unions Ordinance, the authorities ordered trade unions to provide information regarding their activities and publications, accusing them of using funds for political purposes, which is contrary to Section 36 of the Ordinance. In the last three years, authorities also banned all protest activities citing epidemic prevention, and exploited the pandemic to intimidate civil society.
There have been times as well when the way the law was interpreted – or abused – had rather absurd results. In August 2021, the police raided a pro-democracy district councilor’s office in which a 40-people private movie screening was taking place. According to the police, the moviegoers were guilty of breaching the group-gathering ban – an epidemic preventive measure prohibiting any public gathering of more than four people – and proceeded to issue fixed-penalty notices. Eight months later, the police withdrew the notices; the group-gathering ban, in fact, cannot apply to private gatherings, and was most probably used in this case merely to harass the guests of the councilor.
‘Elastic’ arm of the law
That authorities can get away with such loose – and in this case faulty – interpretation of the law has many people worried over the proposed crowdfunding legislation. As it is, it means that all crowdfunding activities will come under close scrutiny by the authorities and national security will become a key criterion in the approval process. Crowdfunding organizers will be required to fill in a statement promising that the activities will not jeopardize national security. The organizers’ backgrounds, including whether they committed offenses relating to public safety and national security, will also be screened.
Apparently, too, it will affect those who rely on income from online subscriptions. After the mass disbandment of NGOs and media in 2021, some Hong Kong journalists and activists have persisted in their work in their own capacity by using content-creator platforms like Patreon to generate income from subscriptions. While the government states that it would exclude this kind of activity from regulation, it insists the income earned from subscriptions or online rewards cannot be used for “any Hong Kong’s political purpose.” The definition of “political purpose,” however, is unclear.
There is also uncertainty about the scope of the law as the government aims to regulate activities that “appeal publicly for funds” without providing a clear definition of “publicly.” Meanwhile, in the consultation papers, the government mentions that some people had raised funds for purposes jeopardizing national security from their colleagues or through “friends-only” social-media posts or other non-public platforms. Thus, it remains a question whether the proposed law will have a wide scope to cover non-public fundraisings such as those taking place within a friend-circle or a neighborhood.
What is clear, though, is that the proposed law will impose political censorship on crowdfunding, deterring people from making donations and burdening NGOs with plenty of legal requirements. It will deal a crippling blow to already struggling NGOs, which have found it hard to access funding resources, since receiving foreign funds can be regarded as “collusion with foreign forces” under the national security law. The draconian law has already scared off many people from making donations to NGOs, in particular to advocacy groups, due to fear of prosecution.
The government also seeks to expand the police power so that authorities can request financial institutions to provide fund records, enter and search any place suspected of being connected with unlawful crowdfunding activities, and request local network or host providers to restrict access to any online crowdfunding platform involving in “any unlawful activities.”
It is of grave concern that self-censorship may occur on these platforms since their owners, to avoid trouble with the government, may proactively deny politically sensitive NGOs or activists access to their services.
Then again, some platform owners may already be doing that. ●
Andrew Shum is a Hong Kong human rights activist based in the United Kingdom. He was the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Professional Teachers’ Union and the cofounder of the Civil Rights Observer. Both groups disbanded due to political pressure.
