{"id":6605,"date":"2026-03-24T10:14:20","date_gmt":"2026-03-24T03:14:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.amnesty.or.th\/en\/?p=6605"},"modified":"2026-04-22T11:58:08","modified_gmt":"2026-04-22T04:58:08","slug":"what-is-hong-kongs-article-23-law-10-things-you-need-to-know","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.amnesty.or.th\/en\/blog\/2026\/03\/what-is-hong-kongs-article-23-law-10-things-you-need-to-know\/","title":{"rendered":"What is Hong Kong\u2019s Article 23 law? 10 things you need to know"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Hong Kong government has passed new national security legislation \u2013 known as Article 23 \u2013 that will severely undermine human rights in the city. Here are 10 key facts about the law:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This law is a quarter-century in the making<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

When Hong Kong was handed over to China by the United Kingdom in 1997, the two countries\u2019 governments gave the city its own mini-constitution, called the Basic Law. Article 23 of the Basic Law states that Hong Kong \u201cshall enact laws on its own\u201d to prohibit seven types of national security offences. But such a law was never passed; a previous attempt to push through Article 23 in 2003 was scrapped following peaceful mass protests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This time, protests have been restricted under other repressive laws, including the 2020 National Security Law (NSL), meaning authorities could rapidly enact Article 23 (officially now called the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance). While there is some overlap with the NSL, Article 23 has also created new offences, increased penalties for existing offences and given the government even more sweeping powers of enforcement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

China\u2019s definition of \u201cnational security\u201d and \u201cstate secrets\u201d is now law in Hong Kong<\/strong> <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The new law copies its definition of \u201cnational security\u201d from mainland China, where it is a vague concept covering \u201cmajor interests of the state\u201d. In practice, this means basically everything.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The law also introduces mainland China\u2019s definition of \u201cstate secrets\u201d, which is extremely broad and can relate to any economic, social, technological or scientific developments, even when they have never been officially classified as secrets. In addition, the Chief Executive \u2013 Hong Kong\u2019s leader \u2013 has the authority to certify whether any material involves state secrets. So again: in practice pretty much anything could be considered a \u201cstate secret\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Interacting with foreigners is more dangerous<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The Article 23 law creates the new offence of \u201cexternal interference\u201d, which targets collaboration between any person and \u201cexternal forces\u201d and carries a maximum 14-year sentence. The details are once again extremely vague: the law states the collaboration with the \u201cexternal force\u201d must take place with \u201cintent to bring about an interference effect\u201d and by \u201cimproper means\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The law also expands the scope of espionage \u2013 you could now be charged with a possible 10-year sentence if you collude with an \u201cexternal force\u201d to publish a false or misleading statement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Police<\/div>
Hong Kong police now have greater powers to crack down on dissent \u00a9ISAAC LAWRENCE\/AFP via Getty Images<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

So what exactly are \u201cexternal forces\u201d? Under Article 23, they can be foreign governments, foreign political parties, international organizations, foreign organizations pursuing political ends, or any related entity or individual associated with those bodies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is likely the law will be used to conflate legitimate cooperation between Hong Kong residents or groups with overseas institutions \u2013 for example in business, academia, civil society or even the UN \u2013 with criminal activity. Foreign citizens can also be prosecuted if they commit these \u201ccrimes\u201d in Hong Kong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Up to 10 years in jail for criticizing the government<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The UK government abolished its sedition law in 2009 \u2013 with the Justice Minister at the time calling it an \u201carcane law from a bygone era<\/a>\u201d. However, the Hong Kong government has recently been making use of its own colonial-era sedition law \u2013 which had lain dormant for 50 years \u2013 and looks set to ramp up this tactic thanks to Article 23.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new law expands the scope of the sedition law and increases the maximum jail sentence from two years to seven years (or 10 years if there is an \u201cexternal force\u201d involved). The law expressly states that an intention to incite violence is not <\/em>necessary to convict a person of sedition, contrary to the common law principle that speech that doesn\u2019t incite violence should not be punished under the law. This means that any criticism of the Hong Kong or Chinese government could potentially fall under its scope.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You could be jailed for not reporting others<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

This new national security law obliges any Chinese citizen (which includes most Hongkongers) to notify the police if they know that another person has committed, or is about to commit, treason. Failure to do so is punishable by up to 14 years in prison.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In effect, this imposes on people in Hong Kong a duty to spy on fellow residents. It is likely to increase the existing climate of fear among Hongkongers and prevent them from freely expressing opinions within their communities and social groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n