Late at night on June 30th Hong Kong’s national security law was revealed to the public after being enacted earlier the same day by China’s legislature. By refusing to publish and discuss drafts, Beijing signalled its contempt for international opinion, for the people from Hong Kong and even for the Hong Kong executive which was humiliated by having to defend a law which it had been not allowed to see before its enactment.
As many commentators have noted the law has very little to do with China’s national security and much to do with suppression of democratic freedoms and stifling of debate in Hong Kong. The four offences which it creates, secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion with foreign forces are vaguely defined and subject to the interpretation of the Chinese regime. This is truly a liberticide law. For instance, simply advocating Hong Kong independence or even self-determination can carry a penalty of life imprisonment.
Liberal democracies have a duty to respond and to stand with the people of Hong Kong. We can certainly expect a more forceful reaction than that of the European Commission. Saying that “the European Union is concerned that the law risks seriously undermining the high degree of autonomy of Hong Kong” when the law destroys this autonomy is beyond diplomatic niceties. One possibility would be to show a greater commitment to the defence of the probable next target of Beijing, Taiwan. Europe could, for instance, visibly reinforce its presence through the European Economic and Trade Office in Taiwan.
There is another important concern with the so-called National Security law, which directly impacts European fundamental interests: it infringes on the rights of foreigners in general and those of European citizens in particular. Its article 38 states “This Law shall apply to offences under this Law committed against the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region from outside the Region by a person who is not a permanent resident of the Region.” Yes, a European citizen who in her home country argues in favour of self-determination for Hong Kong (or Taiwan, or Tibet for that matter) falls afoul of the law and could be imprisoned. The same holds for a European parliamentarian who calls for sanctions against China. And by writing this column, so have I.
It is not enough for Beijing to muzzle European citizens; it also attempts to impose obligations on non-Chinese political organizations. According to article 43 of “When handling cases concerning offense endangering national security, … the department for safeguarding national security of the Police Force of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region may also take the following measures: … (5) requiring a political organisation of a foreign country or outside the mainland, Hong Kong or Macao… to provide information”. This also applies to agents of such organizations. If members of a European political party or an NGO meet with a Hong Kong dissident, the party or its leaders can be held responsible if they do not provide information about the contents of the discussion!
Extraterritoriality is complex and I certainly do not want to suggest that a government cannot, for instance, punish terrorists who are plotting an attack while in another country. But threatening the exercise of free speech by European citizens in Europe is totally unacceptable and, shockingly, the EU statement on the law does not even mention it.
Liberal democracies must act. We have already, to our credit, accepted a very asymmetric flow of information between China and the West, where western media and information exchange platforms are banned by Beijing, and where even the Chinese instruments of state propaganda are allowed free reins on our televisions. But we cannot accept censorship of the views expressed in Europe and the rest of the world and cannot wait until the law has actually been used against a European citizen. Its existence by itself is outrageous, and we cannot, like the legendary frog, wait for the water to boil.
To his credit, vice-President Biden has taken a courageous stand against this aspect of the law. According to Reuters, he said that if elected he would “prohibit U.S. companies from abetting repression and supporting the Chinese Communist Party’s surveillance state” and would “impose swift economic sanctions” if Beijing “tries to silence U.S. citizens, companies, and institutions for exercising their First Amendment rights.”
The European Union must also act. Asking for a repeal of the law will not be successful and has no bite, but we can make it costly for China and for Chinese officials to restrict the freedoms of European citizens. We can amend European and national laws to hold personally responsible foreign individuals who conspire against the rights of European citizens by passing laws of the same type as the national security law or by participating in the enforcement of such laws, including the current one. Yes, there would be a degree of extraterritoriality, but those who participate actively in the trampling of the rights of European citizens must be held accountable.
Jacques Crémer
4 replies on “Europe must protect its citizens’ rights”
Hi, this is a comment.
To get started with moderating, editing, and deleting comments, please visit the Comments screen in the dashboard.
Commenter avatars come from Gravatar.
Prof. Cremer,
I was a student of yours at TSE, an HK citizen, and now a successful entrepreneur in Asia.
I’ve lived in the US, France, Hong Kong, and Mainland China for the past 15 years. After reading your article, I have every reason to be concerned about EU and China relationship, as misconceptions and idiosyncratic judgements pervade during this time of turbulence.
Firstly, I’m with you and feel sad that I have to use VPN to access my Gmail, Facebook, and even to talk to your blog in Mainland China. When I established my business presence post-TSE, I also encountered many ugly business practices in China, such as copy-catting my company’s IP, some corrupted local government officials, unfair competition from State-backed firms, and I can go on and on.
But what you wrote breaks my heart, because it is no where close to what is really happening in China and Hong Kong. And I can foresee a very problematic era of international relations if as the most-respected academic heavy-weight in Europe, you are thinking like what you wrote.
Rather than laying down conceptual frameworks, I hope I can share with you from a real, genuine and a personal perspective. I immigrated to Hong Kong after 10 years living in the US and France. While I was mostly welcomed in the rest of the world, Hong Kong, now as part of China, ironically has become the most dangerous place for anyone who speaks Cantonese with a mandarin accent in the past 10 years. In fact, I only speak English when I get out in Hong Kong. My wife and son have been attacked by localist groups on subways. My Hong Kong employees were disturbed my localists and extremists comments online and couldn’t focus on work since the protest began last year.
Much of this was caused by an incompetent opposition camp, who by no means is close to any opposition camps at places where you called “democracies”. Having you seen legislators openly pouring water onto each other’s face? Have you seen senators throwing rotten plants onto the senate floor during meetings? Can you imagine a French parliament member openly provoking hatred toward minority groups or supporting restaurants who discriminate against non-local groups? These are all happening in Hong Kong, and people are doing this in the name of Freedom. They think they are “free” to discriminate others, to attack others, and make up fake stories to provoke societal hatred. They think that all legal and moral wrong-doings can be justified as far as they cast a “vote” to say “yes”.
If people in Hong Kong, the most westernized city of China, act like this in the name of “democracy”, how will the rest of China become if this “democracy” is replicated throughout China? This is how ugly “democracy” and “freedom” has turn into in this part of the world.
You may think Taiwan is a good example, but no, I’ve done so much business with Taiwanese business counterparts. Please go there, and see how much they have misunderstood and hated Mainland Chinese, after years of “brainwashing” by its “free” media. Or maybe you can never feel that if you are not from there since you are Chinese. Now after reading your article, I’m only more convinced that this misconception – and sometimes hatred – toward Mainland Chinese will be worse after people read it.
Please allow me to humbly selfish – I don’t want to talk about grand values, be it “democracy” or “freedom” – I now worry about my wife and son being attacked by mobs only because they are proud they are Chinese, I worry about my Hong Kong employees and friends losing their competitive edge and become ashes of a political movement that goes nowhere.
If Europe acts like you have suggested, it will lose its most important ally in China, the group who have studied, lived, and done business in Europe and the US, the group who want to push China to change internally, and the group who have been actively engaged with the international community. Pushing China to change by invoking localism, provoking hatred between groups, and bluntly accusing China using the much-confused-word “democracy” or “freedom”, only show that the West is not interested in helping the group solve China’s real problems. China is as complex as France and many parts of the world – it’s not perfect, but it’s not evil either.
Lastly, up until this point, there’s a very high probability that I’ll be labeled as brainwashed by the CCP or that this whole reply is based on dummy accounts hired by the CCP. So, let me credit myself a bit by sharing with you some of my best memories about TSE. I have lots of good memories in the Manufacture des Tabacs, and I can’t express enough gratitude for the scholarship I received from TSE. The person that I want to thank the most was Aude, the former secretary who is no longer with the school. She was like a mom who helped my every step settling down in Toulouse when I first arrived.
I hope my former professors and friends can spend some time in China and Hong Kong, to experience both the ugly and beautiful part of it, before speaking up. I loved Toulouse, the Garonne was beautiful during sunset. I’ve also had bad experience being pickpocketed in Toulouse, harassed by homeless people in Paris, treated as a second class citizen when I reported the cases to the local prefecture, BUT I never thought it could represent the Toulouse and France I know.
After all, the world is not black or white, choosing either side only divides us, especially when we point fingers at places we’ve never lived in, at people we have never spent time with, or at idiosyncratic concepts such as Democracy or Freedom that we find it hard to define clearly.
We live in an age of information-complacency – everyone thinks they can browse the internet so that they know “everything happening everywhere”. I have CNN, Fox News, BBC, France 24, SCMP, and a few Chinese “evil” media Apps installed on my phone and ready them everyday, but I still feel humbled by how big the world is, and how little I know.
Yours Sincerely,
A Former Student
Dear ex-student,
Thank you very much for commenting (and thank you very much before this for coming to study in Toulouse – we do love having students from China). I am sorry that my post upset you. Let me just answer some of your points.
First, the main point of my post was in the second part: that the “National Security” law had an extraterritorial element which is totally unacceptable. Whether I am right or wrong on the other points, I do not think that the European Commission and the European national governments should tolerate that there exists a law on the books of China/Hong Kong that makes it a crime for me to call for self-determination for Hong Kong while I am in France, even if I am doing nothing more than speaking about it. And I would think this whether or not I am for self-determination for Hong Kong.
Second, I am sure that there are ugly aspects to the nationalist tendencies in Hong Kong, but I have not experienced them or seen much written about them. Hence, I will not comment, but I would certainly condemn without reservation the type of behavior you describe.
Third, democracy is rarely pretty in its day to day functioning. In the case of the Hong Kong opposition, you must admit that they have lots of reasons to be frustrated given that the system set up in the basic law was so biased. I am sure that democracy in China will be as rough and tumble as anywhere, but I see no reason it should be worse.
Fourth, I am saddened about your statements about hate for China. I do truly love China, and certainly understand why you are proud to be Chinese – I would if I were. I have tremendously enjoyed the time I have spent there. I think that the escape from poverty that she has witnessed in the last forty years is wonderful, and I have never, ever, felt that keeping China down should be an aim of Western diplomacy. I thought a long time before writing this post and tweeting about the Hong Kong situation, as I realized it will make it very difficult, if not impossible, to ever travel to China again and this hurts. I criticize some of the policies of the CCP; it does not, I hope, prevent me from being a friend of China.
On a different note, you speak about the good time you had at the Manufacture. We have moved to a fantastic new building (https://www.wallpaper.com/architecture/architects-directory-alumni-toulouse-school-of-economics-grafton-architects-france) – I hope you can come and visit it soon. If you do, please knock on my door.
Best,
J.
Thanks Prof. Cremer for your reply.
I understand the point you were trying to make. I hope that when the general public and European politicians receive the message, it can be as clear as you clarified – it’s more about the extraterritorial element imposed on European citizens, not about the so-called self-determination movement in Hong Kong. On that point, I’m with you – I do not agree with the extraterritorial element.
The world has had enough pain, past and current, because of the vaguely defined “democracy” and “freedom”. We are the minority that know, communicate, and manage these two words well. I truly hope these two words would not further divide the world.
On your point of opposition camps’ frustration, frustration should have red lines. Joe Biden and Donald Trump would be condemned national-wide if they threw any racially discriminative language during their campaign. Macron or Hollande would never dare to speak a single line against black or Algerian community to get votes. Sadly, in Hong Kong, in order to get votes, opposition politicians are opening supporting “yellow” restaurants and shops to put discriminative language against Mainland Chinese. Some extreme media is also encouraging radical rioters to attack whoever do not agree with their opinions – they call it freedom of speech. Look at how African countries and the Middle East are killing their own people. The legal, cultural, and educational level in those places are far from supporting the democracy and freedom I personally enjoyed in the US and Europe.
Afterall, the Chinese people want democracy and freedom more than any outsiders do, but it will take some time.
It’d sad that you’ll have to worry whether you’ll be able to come to China because you posted this article. Please bare with me that many of us – the group who have studied, lived, and worked all over the world – would definitely love to invite you to China in the future, regardless of your personal opinions. But, if the world keeps hammering China from the wrong aspects, for example by turning a blind eye on the localist groups spreading hatred and discriminating against Mainland Chinese, we, as reformists, will have to stand on the other side. When this happens, China and the West, and the whole world will only be further divided.
I planned to take my son to live in France for the summer (to let him experience the country by himself), but sadly now the pandemic is raging across the world. I hope I can visit TSE when the pandemic is over, and I’ll come by to say hello for sure.
Stay healthy and stay strong.