representatives of civil society organizations in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
Cases- Related Defender story
- Human rights defender's story: Hong Kong civil society
- Case status
- Unresolved
- Location of case in SG report
- 2021-020-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2021
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 35.86166
Longitude: 104.195397
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- China
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- Dates of prior UN action
- 1 September 2020
- Type of record
- General situation addressed
- Gender
- Gender unclear
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
Civil society actors
- Type of rights defended
- Unclear in SG Report
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Engagement with UN body
- OHCHR: OHCHR - General
- UN Special Procedures: UN Special Procedures - General
- UN Treaty Bodies: UN Treaty Bodies - General
- Type of attempted engagement
- Submission of information to UN
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- June 2020
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- Hong Kong
- Reprisal information
Some representatives of civil society organizations in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region declined to engage further with OHCHR and two of the UN human rights mechanisms, including special procedures and treaty bodies, or have their cases taken up by the UN, due to a fear that they would be in contravention of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in Hong Kong (“National Security Law”),18 passed in June 2020
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- Yes
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- Yes
- Further case development
Some representatives of civil society organizations in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region declined to engage further with OHCHR and two of the UN human rights mechanisms, including special procedures and treaty bodies, or have their cases taken up by the UN, due to a fear that they would be in contravention of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in Hong Kong (“National Security Law”),18 passed in June 2020. In particular, their concern is reportedly that they would be targeted for “collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security,” one of four distinct categories of offences alongside secession, subversion, and terrorism. 21. On 1 September 2020, special procedures mandate holders provided comments to the Government on the law, expressing “concerns pertaining to the protection and role of civil society which may be negatively impacted by the application of this legislation.” In their communication, they referred to a previous special procedures report19 which “cautions that overly broad definitions of what constitutes threats to national security results in a chilling effect on civic space, the stigmatization of civil society actors, and excludes civil society from engaging in national and international fora” (CHN 17/2020).
- Government response dates
- 30 October 2020; 20 August 2021
- Government response content
the Government responded in detail, refuting their assessment of the law and stating that “the establishment and improvement by China, at the national level, of the legal system and enforcement mechanism for national security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is a necessary and legitimate step to fill gaps in the national security legislation of Hong Kong, to practically safeguard national sovereignty and security and to protect the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong, and a necessary and practical move to ensure the long-term stability of the One Country, Two Systems structure” and which “protects the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents.”
On 20 August 2021, the Government responded to the note verbale sent in connection to the present report, stating that “the information presented has arbitrarily used unconfirmed information, distorted China’s efforts in combating illegal and criminal activities in accordance with the law, and grossly interfered in China’s internal affairs and judicial sovereignty”. The Government stated that law enforcement authorities in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region have taken actions solely against criminal acts and their actions have nothing to do with the background or the political position of the individuals involved in a case. 28. The Government rejected the “biased and groundless accusations made in the report against the Hong Kong National Security Law” and stated the law does “not affect the lawful exercise of rights and freedoms by Hong Kong residents, including criticizing the administration of the Government or the policies and decisions of officials, or freedom of information, academic freedom, policy research, general business activities and general engagement and cooperation with international organizations (including the United Nations).” The Government stated that the law “prohibits activities in which foreign countries or external elements use Hong Kong for purposes of secession, subversion, infiltration and sabotage” and that “has clearly defined the specific components of the crime of colluding with a foreign county or with external elements to endanger national security, and law- abiding people would not accidentally break the law.”
- Was the case raised by a State at the UN?
- Yes
- Which State raised the case at the UN and when?
The United States of America raised the case in September 2023 at the 54th session of the HRC during the interactive dialogue with the Assistant Secretary-General on the report on reprisals; “We condemn Hong Kong's extra-territorial application of the National Security Law by issuing bounties for information leading to the arrest of eight pro-democracy activists who no longer live in Hong Kong. This is a dangerous precedent that fails to respect other countries' sovereignty and threatens human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
The United States of America raised the case in September 2024 at the Third Committee session during the interactive dialogue with the Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights, Ilze Brands Kehris; “We condemn Hong Kong’s extra-territorial application of the National Security Law by issuing bounties for information leading to the arrest of eight pro-democracy activists who no longer live in Hong Kong.”
Liechtenstein raised the case in September 2024 at the 57th session of the HRC during the interactive dialogue with the Assistant Secretary-General on the report on reprisals; “We share concerns about systematic legal impediments to engagement with the UN, including concerns raised by the High Commissioner and Special Procedures mandate holders in relation to the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance in Hong Kong.”
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- Yes
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 1
- In which SG report was this case followed up on? 0
- 2022
- Follow up information provided in SG report 0
- The cases of some representatives of civil society organizations in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, who declined to engage further with UN human rights mechanisms, including special procedures and treaty bodies, or have their cases taken up by the UN, due to fear that they would be in contravention of the National Security Law (2020), were included in the 2021 report of the Secretary-General. The main reported concern is that they risked being targeted for “collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security”. The Government responded, rejecting what it called “biased and groundless accusations” against the Hong Kong National Security Law which, it stated, did “not affect the lawful exercise of rights and freedoms by Hong Kong residents, […] and general engagement and cooperation with international organizations (including the United Nations).”
- According to information received by OHCHR, during the reporting period, some civil society organizations and human rights groups in Hong Kong have disbanded, ceased operations, or/and gone into exile due to the National Security Law, and some individuals associated with civil society and human rights groups were reportedly arrested under the law, or targeted and left Hong Kong. Civil society actors from within the region and abroad have continued to express fear of cooperation with the United Nations, discontinued cooperation or declined to engage with OHCHR and UN human rights mechanisms since they perceive this cooperation could be construed as in contravention with the National Security Law, and in particular with its provisions under “collusion with a foreign country or with external elements to endanger national security”. Names and details of individuals and groups concerned are withheld for fear of reprisals.
- Followup Trends 0
- Stayed same
- Date of follow up 0
- 24 September 2021
- Did the government respond? 0
- Yes
- Was this case followed up by a UN body? 0
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic