Frequently Asked Questions - Guidance on Marking of Goods of Hong Kong – Executive Order 13936

Every article of foreign origin or its container imported into the Customs territory of the United States shall be marked in a conspicuous place and in such manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the United States the English name of the country of origin of the article (19 U.S.C. §1304 and 19 CFR 134.11).

Imported goods that are produced in Hong Kong that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption into the United States after the transition period must be marked to indicate that their origin is “China” for purposes of 19 U.S.C. § 1304.

Goods that are not marked properly after the transition period may be brought into a Foreign Trade Zone to be properly marked under a permit to manipulate issued by the Port Director.

Similarly, goods which are improperly or falsely marked may be brought into an FTZ under a permit to manipulate to correct or remove such marking so as to comply with the laws and regulations (19 CFR 134.13(b)).

The change in marking requirements does not affect country of origin determinations for purposes of assessing ordinary duties under Chapters 1-97 of the HTSUS or temporary or additional duties under Chapter 99 of the HTSUS. Therefore, goods that are products of Hong Kong should continue to report International Organization for Standardization (ISO) country code “HK” as the country of origin when required.

RRead more HERE.

WTO Panel Rebuffs U.S. Move to Consider Hong Kong as China for Origin Marking

On December 21, 2022, the following statement was released by USTR Spokesperson Adam Hodge

"The United States strongly rejects the flawed interpretation and conclusions in the World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel report released today regarding Hong Kong, China’s challenge to the U.S. determination and action suspending differential treatment for marks of origin. The U.S. action responded to highly concerning actions by the People’s Republic of China to erode Hong Kong, China’s autonomy and the democratic and human rights of its people, threatening U.S. national security interests.

"The Biden Administration remains committed to preserving U.S. national security and protecting human rights and democracy, and taking action to protect national security is a right inherent to any sovereign nation and explicitly reflected in the WTO Agreement. The United States has held the clear and unequivocal position, for over 70 years, that issues of national security cannot be reviewed in WTO dispute settlement, and the WTO has no authority to second-guess the ability of a WTO Member to respond to what it considers a threat to its security.

"The Hong Kong panel report suggests that the United States cannot act to address China’s undermining of democratic and human rights and democracy in Hong Kong. To be clear, the United States does not intend to remove the marking requirement as a result of this report, and we will not cede our judgment or decision-making over essential security matters to the WTO. This report further underscores the need for fundamental WTO reform and the United States will continue to work constructively with Members to ensure that the WTO remains relevant to the lives of all people."

BACKGROND

On August 11, 2020, U.S. Customs and Border Protection published in the Federal Register (85 FR 48551) notice that in light of the President's Executive Order on Hong Kong Normalization, issued on July 14, 2020, suspending the application of section 201(a) of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 to the marking statute, section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, with respect to imported goods produced in Hong Kong, such goods may no longer be marked to indicate "Hong Kong" as their origin, but must be marked to indicate "China." Given the commercial realities, CBP is allowing a transition period to implement new marking. The transition period extends through September 25, 2020.

Hong Kong 25 Years After Handover

Hong Kong 25 Years After Handover

A statement from Antony J. Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State

On July 1, we mark the 25th anniversary of the handover of Hong Kong to the People’s Republic of China. This date was envisioned as the halfway point of 50 years of promised autonomy under the “One Country, Two Systems” framework. Yet it is now evident that Hong Kong and Beijing authorities no longer view democratic participation, fundamental freedoms, and an independent media as part of this vision.

In 2019, millions of Hong Kongers joined public protests to oppose controversial extradition legislation. Beijing’s response – the National Security Law – set the stage for an erosion of autonomy and dismantling of the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents over the last two years. Authorities have jailed the opposition, with many imprisoned for more than a year. Hong Kong’s leaders have raided independent media organizations, shuttered museums and removed public works of art, weakened democratic institutions, delayed elections, prevented vigils, disqualified sitting lawmakers, and instituted loyalty oaths. Government officials have spread disinformation that grassroots protests were the work of foreign actors. They have done all of this in an effort to deprive Hong Kongers of what they have been promised.

We stand in solidarity with people in Hong Kong and reinforce their calls for their promised freedoms to be reinstated.

G7 foreign ministers’ statement on Hong Kong Legislative Council elections

On December 20, 2021, the G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union, noting the outcome of the Legislative Council elections in Hong Kong which took place on 19 December 2021, expressed grave concern over the erosion of democratic elements of the Special Administrative Region's electoral system, stating:

"The package of changes to the electoral system introduced earlier this year in Hong Kong, including the reduction of the number of directly elected seats and the establishment of a new vetting process to severely restrict the choice of candidates on the ballot paper, undermined Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy under the "One Country, Two Systems" principle.

"We strongly reiterate our call on China to act in accordance with the Sino-British Joint Declaration and its other legal obligations, and respect fundamental rights and freedoms in Hong Kong, as provided for in the Basic Law. We also call on the China and the Hong Kong authorities to restore confidence in Hong Kong's political institutions and end the unwarranted oppression of those who promote democratic values and the defense of rights and freedoms."

Hong Kong Autonomy Act Report to Congress

On December 20, 2021, the Hong Kong Autonomy Act Report to Congress was released. It underscores the United States’ deep concerns about Beijing’s clear efforts to deprive Hong Kongers of a meaningful voice in the December 19 Legislative Council (LegCo) elections. The report is available at https://www.state.gov/december-2021-update-to-report-on-identification-of-foreign-persons-involved-in-the-erosion-of-the-obligations-of-china-under-the-joint-declaration-or-the-basic-law/.

Under the Hong Kong Autonomy Act, the Secretary of State is required to update Congress regularly on foreign persons who are materially contributing to, have materially contributed to, or attempt to contribute materially to the failure of the PRC to meet its obligations under the Sino-British Joint Declaration or Hong Kong’s Basic Law, as defined by the Act.

The United States remains seriously concerned at the continued erosion of human rights in Hong Kong

On October 21. 2021, the U.S. Department of State issued the following statement:

"The United States remains seriously concerned at the continued erosion of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including political participation, in Hong Kong. We note in particular the increase in politically-motivated prosecutions, including through the National Security Law, targeting Hong Kong’s teachers, labor unions, lawyers, journalists, health care workers, student unions, and individual citizens. We again call on the Beijing and Hong Kong authorities to release those unjustly detained and cease their crackdown on peaceful civil society organizations. We once more urge Beijing to abide by its treaty obligations in the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

"Hong Kong authorities continue to disqualify scores of pro-democracy district councilors, who received their public mandate from free and fair elections in 2019. These retroactive and targeted disqualifications, based on the Hong Kong authorities’ arbitrary determination that these district councilors’ loyalty oaths are invalid, prevent people in Hong Kong from participating meaningfully in their own governance.

"People in Hong Kong and its vibrant civil society have been the city’s greatest resource and the cornerstone of Hong Kong’s success as an international hub of business and exchange. We will continue to support people in Hong Kong and their rights and freedoms."

Issuance of a Hong Kong Business Advisory

On July 16, the U.S. Department of State, along with the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the U.S. Department of Commerce, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, issued a business advisory to caution U.S. businesses about emerging risks to their operations and activities in Hong Kong. Many of these risks stem from the implementation of the Law of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, also known as the National Security Law (NSL), and other recent legislative changes.

Developments over the last year in Hong Kong present clear operational, financial, legal, and reputational risks for multinational firms. This business advisory provides companies with information that can assist them in making informed business decisions and properly assessing risk.

The policies which the PRC government and the Government of Hong Kong have implemented undermine the legal and regulatory environment that is critical for individuals and businesses to operate freely and with legal certainty in Hong Kong.

Businesses should be aware that the risks faced in mainland China are now increasingly present in Hong Kong. The National Security Law and actions taken by PRC and Hong Kong authorities may negatively affect their staff, finances, legal compliance, reputation, and operations.

The advisory highlights the following:

• Businesses operating in Hong Kong, as well as individuals and businesses conducting business on their behalf, are subject to the laws of Hong Kong, including the National Security Law. Foreign nationals, including one U.S. citizen, have been arrested under the NSL.
• Businesses face risks associated with electronic surveillance without warrants and the surrender of corporate and customer data to authorities.
• Businesses that rely on a free and open press may face restricted access to information.
• Individuals and entities should be aware of potential consequences of certain types of engagement with sanctioned individuals or entities.
• Businesses operating in Hong Kong may face heightened risks and uncertainty related to PRC retaliation against companies that comply with sanctions imposed by the United States and other countries, including through enforcement of the PRC’s Countering Foreign Sanctions Law.

Businesses with potential exposure should be aware of the potential reputational, economic, and legal risks of maintaining a presence or staff in Hong Kong.

In order to mitigate reputational and other risks, businesses should apply industry due diligence policies and procedures to address applicable and identified risks.

Statement by Canada Minister of Foreign Affairs on closure of Hong Kong newspaper, Apple Daily

On June 23, 2021, The Honourable Marc Garneau, Minister of Foreign Affairs, issued the following statement on the announcement of the closure of the Hong Kong newspaper, Apple Daily:

“The forced closure of the newspaper, Apple Daily, as a result of charges under the National Security Law for Hong Kong is a significant blow to freedom of the press and freedom of speech in Hong Kong, and makes it clear that the powers under the National Security Law are being used as a tool to suppress media freedom and punish dissidents.

“These freedoms are universal human rights guaranteed under Hong Kong’s Basic Law, and are in line with international standards.

“Canada is a steadfast supporter of the One Country, Two Systems principle and Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy. The ouster of a major media organization under the National Security Law significantly degrades these principles, guaranteed under the Sino-British Joint Declaration.”

Denial of Democracy in Hong Kong

Antony J. Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State, has released this statement:

"The Chinese government continues to undermine the democratic institutions of Hong Kong, denying Hong Kong residents the rights that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) itself has guaranteed. The Hong Kong Legislative Council (LegCo) passage on May 27 of new measures that alter the composition of the LegCo and Election Commission severely constrains people in Hong Kong from meaningfully participating in their own governance and having their voices heard.

"Decreasing Hong Kong residents’ electoral representation will not foster long-term political and social stability for Hong Kong.  This legislation defies the Basic Law’s clear acknowledgment that the ultimate objective is the election of all members of the LegCo by universal suffrage.  We once again call on the PRC and the Hong Kong authorities to allow the voices of all Hong Kongers to be heard.  We also call on these authorities to release and drop charges against all individuals charged under the National Security Law and other laws merely for standing for election or for expressing dissenting views.  The United States stands united with our allies and partners in speaking out for the human rights and fundamental freedoms guaranteed to the people in Hong Kong by the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law."

U.S. Secretary of State Reports that Hong Kong Does not Warrent Differential Treatment from China

Over the past year, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has continued to dismantle Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy, in violation of its obligations under the Sino-British Joint Declaration and Hong Kong’s Basic Law. In particular, the PRC government's adoption and the Hong Kong government’s implementation of the National Security Law (NSL) have severely undermined the rights and freedoms of people in Hong Kong.

Each year, the Department of State submits to Congress the Hong Kong Policy Act Report and accompanying certification. In conjunction with this year’s report, U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Bliken has certified to Congress that Hong Kong does not warrant differential treatment under U.S. law in the same manner as U.S. laws were applied to Hong Kong before July 1, 1997.

This report documents many of the actions the PRC and Hong Kong governments have taken against Hong Kong’s promised high degree of autonomy, freedoms, and democratic institutions. These include the arbitrary arrests and politically-motivated prosecutions of opposition politicians, activists, and peaceful protesters under the NSL and other legislation; the postponement of Legislative Council elections; pressure on judicial independence and academic and press freedoms; and a de facto ban on public demonstrations.

G7 Foreign Ministers’ Statement on Hong Kong Electoral Reform

On March 12, 2021, the G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America and the High Representative of the European Union, united in expressing grave concerns at the Chinese authorities’ decision fundamentally to erode democratic elements of the electoral system in Hong Kong and released the following statement:

"Such a decision strongly indicates that the authorities in mainland China are determined to eliminate dissenting voices and opinions in Hong Kong.

"The package of changes approved by the National People’s Congress, combined with mass arrests of pro-democracy activists and politicians, undermines Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy under the “One Country, Two Systems” principle. The package will also stifle political pluralism, contrary to the aim of moving towards universal suffrage as set out in the Basic Law. Furthermore, the changes will reduce freedom of speech, which is a right guaranteed in the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

"The people of Hong Kong should be trusted to cast their votes in the best interests of Hong Kong. Discussion of differing views, not silencing of them, is the way to secure the stability and prosperity of Hong Kong.

"We call on China to act in accordance with the Sino-British Joint Declaration and its other legal obligations and respect fundamental rights and freedoms in Hong Kong, as provided for in the Basic Law. We also call on China and the Hong Kong authorities to restore confidence in Hong Kong’s political institutions and end the unwarranted oppression of those who promote democratic values and the defence of rights and freedoms."

USTR Seeks Comments on Origin Marking Requirement (Hong Kong, China)

On March 11, 2021, the Office of the United States Trade Representative published in the Federal Register (86 FR 13960) WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding United States--Origin Marking Requirement (Hong Kong, China).

On October 30, 2020, Hong Kong, China, requested consultations with the United States concerning certain measures affecting marks of origin with respect to imported goods produced in Hong Kong, China. You can find the consultation request at www.wto.org in a document designated as WT/DS597/1. The United States and Hong Kong, China, held consultations on November 24, 2020. On January 14, 2021, Hong Kong, China, made its request to the WTO to establish a WTO dispute settlement panel. On February 22, 2021, the WTO established a dispute settlement panel to examine Hong Kong, China's complaint.

Hong Kong, China's panel request appears to concern measures that goods produced in Hong Kong, China, be marked to indicate that their origin is in "China" rather than "Hong Kong". These measures include Executive Order 13936 on Hong Kong Normalization, which suspends the application of Section 201(a) of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 (22 U.S.C. 5721(a)) to Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1304), among other statutes; Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930; Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134); Section 201(a) of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992; and Country of Origin Marking of Products of Hong Kong, 85 FR 48551 (August 11, 2020). Hong Kong, China alleges that these measures are inconsistent with Articles I:1, IX:1, X:3(a) of the WTO General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994; Articles 2(c), (d), and (e) of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin; and Article 2.1 of the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.

USTR invites written comments concerning the issues raised in this dispute.

Although USTR will accept any comments during the course of the dispute settlement proceedings, you should submit your comment on or before April 12, 2021 to be assured of timely consideration by USTR.

U.S., Australia, Canada, and UK Issue Joint Statement on Hong Kong

The text of the following statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom.

Begin Text:

We, the Foreign Ministers of Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, and the United States Secretary of State, underscore our serious concern at the mass arrests of 55 politicians and activists in Hong Kong for subversion under the National Security Law.

The National Security Law is a clear breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration and undermines the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ framework. It has curtailed the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong. It is clear that the National Security Law is being used to eliminate dissent and opposing political views.

We call on the Hong Kong and Chinese central authorities to respect the legally guaranteed rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong without fear of arrest and detention. It is crucial that the postponed Legislative Council elections in September proceed in a fair way that includes candidates representing a range of political opinions.

Joint Statement on Hong Kong

The text of the following statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.

Begin Text:

We, the Foreign Ministers of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, and the United States Secretary of State, reiterate our serious concern regarding China’s imposition of new rules to disqualify elected legislators in Hong Kong. Following the imposition of the National Security Law and postponement of September’s Legislative Council elections, this decision further undermines Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy and rights and freedoms.

China’s action is a clear breach of its international obligations under the legally binding, UN-registered Sino-British Joint Declaration. It breaches both China’s commitment that Hong Kong will enjoy a ‘high degree of autonomy’, and the right to freedom of speech.

The disqualification rules appear part of a concerted campaign to silence all critical voices following the postponement of September’s Legislati

ve Council elections, the imposition of charges against a number of elected legislators, and actions to undermine the freedom of Hong Kong’s vibrant media.

We call on China to stop undermining the rights of the people of Hong Kong to elect their representatives in keeping with the Joint Declaration and Basic Law. For the sake of Hong Kong’s stability and prosperity, it is essential that China and the Hong Kong authorities respect the channels for the people of Hong Kong to express their legitimate concerns and opinions.

As a leading member of the international community, we expect China to live up to its international commitments and its duty to the people of Hong Kong. We urge the Chinese central authorities to re-consider their actions against Hong Kong’s elected legislature and immediately reinstate the Legislative Council members.

End text.

Additional 45-day Compliance Period for Executive Order 13936 – Hong Kong Normalization

On August 21, 2020, U.S. Customs and Border Protection announced that the 45-day transition period for compliance with the President’s Executive Order (EO) on Hong Kong Normalization has been extended for an additional 45 days through November 9, 2020.

On July 14, 2020, the President issued Executive Order 13936 dealing with Hong Kong Normalization, and suspended, among other things, the application of section 201(a) of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 to certain statutes, including 19 U.S.C. 1304. On August 11, 2020, CBP issued a notice in the Federal Register (85 FR 48551) notifying the public that, unless excepted from marking, goods produced in Hong Kong must be marked to indicate that their origin is “China” for purposes of 19 U.S.C. 1304. The position set forth in the notice became applicable as of July 29, 2020; however, CBP granted a transition period until September 25, 2020 for importers to implement marking consistent with the notice.

In an effort to allow importers ample time to comply with EO requirements for goods produced in Hong Kong to be appropriately marked with the origin of “China”, CBP is extending the transition period for an additional 45 days, through November 9, 2020. During this period, CBP personnel from the Ports of Entry and Centers of Excellence and Expertise (Centers) should not take any enforcement actions (i.e., marking notices, marking penalties, etc.) on goods produced in Hong Kong for purposes of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Centers and Ports of Entry should take measures to inform accounts and importers of these new marking rules for Hong Kong set forth in the EO.

This change in marking requirements does not affect country of origin determinations for purposes of assessing ordinary duties under Chapters 1-97 of the HTSUS or temporary or additional duties under Chapter 99 of the HTSUS. Entry summary procedures also have not changed. Given that this new rule only applies to marking requirements under 19 U.S.C. 1304, filers should continue to file their entry summaries and submit payments for applicable duties, taxes and fees in accordance with current regulations and policies.

Frequently Asked Questions - Guidance on Marking of Goods of Hong Kong – Executive Order 13936

Q. How does the Hong Kong marking executive order (EO) impact imported goods that are products of Hong Kong after the transition period?

Every article of foreign origin or its container imported into the Customs territory of the United States shall be marked in a conspicuous place and in such manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the United States the English name of the country of origin of the article (19 U.S.C. §1304 and 19 CFR 134.11).

Imported goods that are produced in Hong Kong that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption into the United States after the transition period must be marked to indicate that their origin is “China” for purposes of 19 U.S.C. § 1304.

Goods that are not marked properly after the transition period may be brought into a Foreign Trade Zone to be properly marked under a permit to manipulate issued by the Port Director.

Similarly, goods which are improperly or falsely marked may be brought into an FTZ under a permit to manipulate to correct or remove such marking so as to comply with the laws and regulations (19 CFR 134.13(b)).

See Foreign Trade Zone Manual, Publication #: 0000-0559A (2011), Chapter 8, Paragraph 8.5, available at https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/FTZmanual2011.pdf

Q. How does the marking rule affect the country of origin for purposes of assessing ordinary duties under Chap 1-97 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) or temporary or additional duties under Chapter 99 of the HTSUS?

The change in marking requirements does not affect country of origin determinations for purposes of assessing ordinary duties under Chapters 1-97 of the HTSUS or temporary or additional duties under Chapter 99 of the HTSUS. Therefore, goods that are products of Hong Kong should continue to report International Organization for Standardization (ISO) country code “HK” as the country of origin when required.

Q. How does the EO marking rule affect entry summary requirements, such as country of origin reporting, duty payments, etc.?

This rule only applies to marking requirements under 19 U.S.C. 1304. Entry summary procedures have not changed. Filers should continue to file their entry summaries and duty payments according to current regulation and policy.

Q. What if goods are marked as “Made in China” but qualify for outward processing treatment (OPA) as Hong Kong origin goods?

CBP’s FRN affects marking requirements not country of origin. There is no change with regard to the Outward Processing Arrangements (OPA).

U.S. Customs Law Declares Hong Kong is China, No Long Separate Customs Territory

On August 11, 2020, U.S. Customs and Border Protection published in the Federal Register (85 FR 48551) notice that in light of the President's Executive Order on Hong Kong Normalization, issued on July 14, 2020, suspending the application of section 201(a) of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992 to the marking statute, section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, with respect to imported goods produced in Hong Kong, such goods may no longer be marked to indicate "Hong Kong" as their origin, but must be marked to indicate "China." Given the commercial realities, CBP is allowing a transition period to implement new marking. The transition period extends through September 25, 2020.

The President’s Executive Order on Hong Kong Normalization

On July 14, 2020, the President of the United States of America, signed an Executive Order determining, pursuant to section 202 of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, that the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong (Hong Kong) is no longer sufficiently autonomous to justify differential treatment in relation to the People's Republic of China.

The Order suspends the application of section 201(a) of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, as amended (22 U.S.C. 5721(a)), which is the provision in U.S. law that treats Hong Kong as separate from China as regards the application of certain laws. Specifically the Order list the following statutes:

(a) section 103 of the Immigration Act of 1990 (8 U.S.C. 1152 note);

(b) sections 203(c), 212(l), and 221(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1153(c), 1182(l), and 1201(c), respectively);

(c) the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.);

(d) section 721(m) of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S.C. 4565(m));

(e) the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (50 U.S.C. 4801 et seq.); and

(f) section 1304 of title 19, United States Code. This law relates to the country of origin labeling of imported merchandise and could be disruptive for companies that relocated manufacturing from China to Hong Kong to avoid additional tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as Agathon Associates reported in August 2019.

Statement from U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross on Revocation of Hong Kong Special Status

With the Chinese Communist Part's imposition of new security measures on Hong Kong, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said that the risk that sensitive U.S. technology will be diverted to the People's Liberation Army or Ministry of State Security has increased, all while undermining the territory's autonomy. Those are risks the U.S. refuses to accept and have resulted in the revocation of Hong Kong's special status.

Commerce Department regulations affording preferential treatment to Hong Kong over China, including the availability of export license exceptions, are suspended. Further actions to eliminate differential treatment are also being evaluated.

Joint Statement on Hong Kong – Canada, US, UK, and Australia

"Hong Kong has flourished as a bastion of freedom. The international community has a significant and longstanding stake in Hong Kong's prosperity and stability. Direct imposition of national security legislation on Hong Kong by the Beijing authorities, rather than through Hong Kong's own institutions as provided for under Article 23 of the Basic Law, would curtail the Hong Kong people's liberties, and in doing so, dramatically erode the autonomy and the system that made it so prosperous.

"China's proposals for a new national security law for Hong Kong lies in direct conflict with its international obligations under the principles of the legally-binding, UN-registered Sino-British Joint Declaration. The proposed law would undermine the One Country, Two Systems framework. It also raises the prospect of prosecution in Hong Kong for political crimes, and undermines existing commitments to protect the rights of Hong Kong people - including those set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

"We are also extremely concerned that this action will exacerbate the existing deep divisions in Hong Kong society; the law does nothing to build mutual understanding and foster reconciliation within Hong Kong. Rebuilding trust across Hong Kong society by allowing the people of Hong Kong to enjoy the rights and freedoms they were promised can be the only way back from the tensions and unrest that the territory has seen over the last year.

"The world's focus on a global pandemic requires enhanced trust in governments and international cooperation. Beijing's unprecedented move risks having the opposite effect.

"As Hong Kong’s stability and prosperity are jeopardized by the new imposition, we call on the Government of China to work with the Hong Kong SAR Government and the people of Hong Kong to find a mutually acceptable accommodation that will honor China’s international obligations under the UN-filed Sino-British Joint Declaration."