The Hong Kong government is proposing amendments to subsidiary legislation under the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance to further expand the scope of national security laws. Under the latest proposal, even if an offence is not explicitly listed as a national security crime under the Hong Kong National Security Law or the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, the Chief Executive may issue a certificate declaring that the conduct involves national security. Once such certification is issued, the case can be treated as a national security case.
The government said the new mechanism is intended to establish an enforcement framework for so-called “other offences endangering national security” mentioned in existing legislation. After the Chief Executive issues a certificate, the relevant case would be handled under the national security legal framework across all stages, including investigation, arrest, prosecution, trial, and sentencing.
The Legislative Council’s Security Panel and Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services have held a joint meeting to discuss the proposal. The government plans to adopt a “negative vetting” approach, meaning the subsidiary legislation will take effect immediately upon gazettal and only be reviewed by the legislature afterwards.
Secretary for Security Chris Tang said the amendment does not expand the definition or penalties of national security offences, but rather clarifies the legal framework. He stressed that a case would only be confirmed as a national security case after the issuance of a certificate by the Chief Executive, and that defendants’ rights would not be affected.
However, the Hong Kong Human Rights Information Centre, a group of overseas Hong Kong legal professionals, raised strong concerns. It argued that the proposal grants the Chief Executive greater power to bring non-national security offences under the national security regime, with decisions difficult to challenge through judicial review.
Human rights groups warned that the move could further weaken judicial independence and defendants’ rights, while broadening the scope of national security law applications. They noted that national security cases already involve designated judges, higher bail thresholds, and special procedures, and the new changes could extend such restrictions to more cases.
Commentary:
The key issue in the amendment is the expansion of executive discretion in determining what constitutes a national security case, without clearly defined legal thresholds. As the boundary of national security becomes increasingly broad, it becomes harder for the public to predict which actions may fall within its scope, raising concerns about legal certainty and public confidence.
The development also suggests Hong Kong’s national security framework is gradually moving closer to the mainland Chinese model, where “national security” is a broad and flexible concept covering political, economic, technological, cultural, and information domains. Law enforcement authorities there also enjoy wider interpretative discretion. The introduction of this subsidiary legislation mechanism in Hong Kong signals a continued convergence of the two systems.