Beijing’s domestic security law has turned peaceful protest into criminal conduct
The Law That Erased the Last Freedoms
On March 19, 2024, Hong Kong’s Legislative Council voted unanimously to pass the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, known as Article 23. The vote took just 11 days from introduction to passage. A 212-page bill was reviewed in 39 hours, with no amendments proposed and no genuine public consultation. One year later, the evidence is unambiguous: Article 23 has been used to entrench a new normal of systematic repression, criminalizing peaceful acts in increasingly absurd ways.
What Article 23 Actually Does
The law introduced China’s own definition of “national security” into Hong Kong’s legal code. It created new offenses related to state secrets, espionage, sabotage, and external interference. It extended the reach of the existing 2020 National Security Law by closing what Beijing called “loopholes.” In practice, those loopholes were the last remaining spaces where Hong Kongers could speak, assemble, and protest without fear of arrest.
Sedition Redefined
One of the most significant changes was the expansion of the sedition offense. Under Article 23, sedition no longer requires any incitement to violence. Speech or writing that fuels public distrust of the government is now sufficient for a criminal charge. The maximum prison sentence for sedition was raised from two to seven years, or up to ten years if the act involved “collusion with an external force.” The colonial-era sedition law it replaced was itself a relic of authoritarian governance. Article 23 made it worse.
Arrests for Candles and Clothing
Since the law took effect on March 23, 2024, Amnesty International documented 16 arrests for sedition under Article 23 alone. People have been targeted for the clothes they wear, the posts they share online, and for small symbolic acts such as holding candles on June 4th, the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. The presumption against bail in national security cases has been extended to Article 23 offenses. Defendants who apply for bail face the same standard applied to Jimmy Lai and the NSL 47: that they may “continue to commit acts endangering national security.” This reasoning has been used to deny bail to people accused of posting on social media.
The Scope of Repression in Numbers
By the end of 2024, Hong Kong authorities had arrested a total of 316 persons under both the 2020 National Security Law and the new Safeguarding National Security Ordinance. More than 10,000 people had been arrested in the broader post-2019 crackdown, with at least 2,800 prosecuted. The US-based Hong Kong Democracy Council classified 1,920 of those defendants as political prisoners. These are not criminals. They are people who held signs, wrote articles, attended vigils, and voted in unofficial elections.
Surveillance Powers Expanded
Article 23 also expanded the government’s surveillance powers significantly. The law allows authorities to conduct wiretaps, electronic surveillance, and searches without warrants in national security cases. Internet service providers can be compelled to provide or delete information. Human rights groups have documented credible reports that security services monitor pro-democracy activists, their families, and journalists. This surveillance extends beyond Hong Kong’s borders through the law’s extraterritorial provisions.
The Chilling Effect on Civil Society
The most insidious impact of Article 23 is what it has done to Hong Kong’s civil society without a single arrest. Lawyers self-censor their advice. Teachers avoid politically sensitive topics. Churches canceled memorial masses for Tiananmen victims for the third consecutive year in 2024. Books have been removed from libraries. Universities have purged politically sensitive materials. The sculpture known as the “Pillar of Shame,” which commemorated Tiananmen victims, was dismantled.
Schools Rewired for Loyalty
Hong Kong schools have been mandated to prioritize “patriotic education” based on Xi Jinping Thought. Teachers face dismissal for discussing topics deemed subversive. The next generation of Hong Kongers is being educated not to question power but to serve it. This is not education. It is indoctrination.
The International Response Remains Insufficient
The US State Department’s 2025 Hong Kong Policy Act Report documented the law’s impact in detail, noting that it further eroded Hong Kong’s rule of law and undermined fundamental freedoms. The report noted that bounties had been placed on overseas democracy advocates, passports canceled, and bank accounts frozen. Despite this documentation, the international community has not imposed meaningful consequences sufficient to change Beijing’s behavior.
One Year On: No Turning Back
One year after Article 23 took effect, Human Rights Watch described it as the elimination of “the last vestiges of fundamental freedoms” in the city. There is no indication that Beijing intends to relent. Each new arrest, each canceled vigil, each purged library shelf, adds another brick to the wall of authoritarianism being built around what was once one of the world’s freest cities. The question is no longer whether Hong Kong’s freedoms have been destroyed. They have been. The question is whether the world has the will to demand their restoration.
Yuen Ting
Data, Research & Investigative Support Journalist, Apple Daily UK
Contact: yuenting@appledaily.uk
Yuen Ting is a data and research journalist with expertise in data verification, investigative support, and evidence-based reporting. She completed her journalism training at a leading UK journalism school, focusing on data journalism, statistical literacy, and investigative methodologies.
Her professional experience includes work with Apple Daily and other liberal Chinese publications, where she supports and authors reporting on public records, demographic trends, election data, and institutional accountability. Yuen Ting’s work emphasizes accuracy, reproducibility, and transparent methodology.
She has newsroom experience collaborating with reporters and editors on complex investigations, ensuring claims are supported by verified data and primary documentation. Her role strengthens editorial trust by reinforcing factual foundations behind major stories.
Yuen Ting’s authority stems from her technical expertise and consistent application of verification standards within reputable news organizations. At Apple Daily UK, she delivers trustworthy data-driven journalism that enhances transparency, credibility, and institutional reliability.
