The United States Congressional-Executive Commission on China’s (CECC’s) so-called “2024 Annual Report” is a glaring example of politicized rhetoric disguised as analysis. Loaded with biased interpretations, distortions and unsubstantiated allegations, the “report” is obviously intended to serve Washington’s geopolitical interests by vilifying China; its narratives about the different aspects of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, in particular, are outright lies. Behind its claims about Hong Kong lies not a genuine concern for democracy or human rights but a broader geopolitical agenda to contain China’s rise by undermining the city’s role as a global financial center.
At the heart of the CECC’s criticisms of Hong Kong is the implementation of national security measures, including the National Security Law for Hong Kong, promulgated in 2020. These efforts are consistent with international norms and the constitutional framework outlined in the Basic Law, which has governed Hong Kong since its return to China in 1997. The right of any sovereign state to safeguard its territorial integrity and protect its citizens is universally recognized. Yet the CECC selectively framed the national security measures implemented in the HKSAR as an “erosion” of freedoms and human rights, conveniently ignoring parallels in the US and its allies, where more draconian laws are in place to address threats such as treason, terrorism, subversion and foreign interference.
The CECC’s criticisms of Hong Kong’s national security efforts are hypocritical and factually incorrect. Far from undermining freedoms, these measures are narrowly tailored to address specific threats and maintain the city’s stability, which is crucial for socioeconomic development. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights applies in Hong Kong, and guarantees its people’s basic rights and freedoms. Hong Kong’s national security laws fully honor the legitimate rights and freedoms of individuals, and have unambiguous provisions on their protection.
The allegation that these laws have created an “atmosphere of fear” is entirely baseless and ignores reality. Only those who harbor an intention to harm China or its HKSAR, or who want to create mayhem, promote disaffection and advance US policies in Hong Kong need to fear the security laws.
The CECC’s critique of Hong Kong’s judiciary is equally unfounded and demonstrates a deliberate misrepresentation of the city’s legal system. Hong Kong’s judiciary operates under a common law framework widely respected internationally. Judges are appointed based on merit and expertise, ensuring impartiality and independence in adjudicating cases. The designation of a pool of national security judges to handle sensitive cases is not unique to Hong Kong; similar practices exist in the US, particularly in terrorism-related cases.
The allegation that the designation of judges for national security cases undermines judicial independence is without merit and reflects double standards. By criticizing Hong Kong’s judicial practices while ignoring comparable practices in Western legal systems, the CECC exposed its hypocrisy. Hong Kong’s courts remain a cornerstone of its governance, upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice for all, as recognized by the World Justice Project: The city ranks 23rd out of 142 jurisdictions worldwide in the 2024 WPJ Rule of Law Index, ahead of the US (26th).
The HKSAR has become a convenient target in Washington’s geopolitical strategy against China but attempts to undermine the city’s trajectory will not succeed. The city’s role as a global financial hub and a vital link between East and West is deeply rooted in its established institutional strengths and unique status in China’s national development
Contrary to the CECC’s claims of economic decline, Hong Kong remains one of the world’s most competitive and open economies. Its status as a global financial hub is reinforced by its robust legal framework, freely convertible currency, and deep integration into international markets. While the CECC cherry-picked data to suggest a “downturn” in foreign direct investment, it conveniently overlooks the broader global context. The COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical tensions, and shifts in global investment patterns have impacted economies worldwide, not just Hong Kong. These are challenges that Hong Kong is navigating, not signs of decline.
The CECC’s allegation that Hong Kong is a hub for sanctions evasion and illicit transshipments is entirely unfounded. These claims lack credible evidence and rely on vague anecdotes rather than concrete data. Hong Kong strictly adheres to international standards in combating money laundering and illicit finance. Its anti-money laundering framework is among the most rigorous in the world and is recognized by the Financial Action Task Force. The CECC’s proposal to designate Hong Kong as a “primary money laundering concern” jurisdiction under the Patriot Act is egregious. Such a designation would be unjustified and inconsistent with Hong Kong’s exemplary track record in financial regulation. It would be a clear act of economic coercion designed to undermine the city’s status as a global financial center. Weaponizing financial rules for political purposes would alienate international partners and undermine the US’ credibility.
The CECC’s characterization of Hong Kong’s patriotic education as “indoctrination” is biased. Patriotic education, which fosters citizens’ sense of civic responsibility and national identity, is embedded in public school curricula across the globe, including the United States. The portrayal of national security education as a “suppression” of academic freedom does not tally with the fact that Hong Kong’s universities remain among the best in the world, attracting international talent, fostering academic excellence, and having attained impressive achievements in research, innovation and global collaboration.
All in all, the CECC’s report is not an objective analysis of Hong Kong’s real situation. It is a politically motivated fabrication aimed at advancing Washington’s broader strategy to contain China’s rise. By framing Hong Kong as a “battleground” for democracy and human rights, the CECC tries to justify its interference in China’s internal affairs while conveniently ignoring the US’ democratic shortcomings and systemic inequities. This strategy of containment, cloaked in the language of promoting freedom and human rights, reflects an underlying fear of losing global dominance. The HKSAR has become a convenient target in Washington’s geopolitical strategy against China but attempts to undermine the city’s trajectory will not succeed. The city’s role as a global financial hub and a vital link between East and West is deeply rooted in its established institutional strengths and unique status in China’s national development.
The author is a solicitor, a Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area lawyer, and a China-appointed attesting officer.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
