Punishments for offences under Hong Kong’s new Article 23 bill comparable with penalties in key common law jurisdictions like Australia, UK, Canada and Singapore
- Penalties for offences such as treason, insurrection and sabotage fall largely in line with punishments set out in six other major common law jurisdictions
- Six jurisdictions examined by Post were the US, UK, Australia, Canada, Singapore and New Zealand
Penalties for offences under Hong Kong’s proposed domestic security law are comparable with those of similar jurisdictions around the world, although sedition remains an outlier, data compiled by the Post has found.
Under proposed domestic security legislation presented to the Legislative Council on Friday, penalties for offences such as treason, insurrection and sabotage will fall largely in line with punishments set out in six other major common law jurisdictions.
“The proposed law meets all applicable international conventions and standards, human right protections under national and local laws, and many procedural safeguards,” said Nick Chan Hiu-fung, a lawyer and local delegate to the National People’s Congress.
The six jurisdictions examined were the US, UK, Australia, Canada, Singapore and New Zealand and were among those also cited in a consultation document the government issued ahead of the bill’s publication.
While the specific terms and legislation differed depending on each jurisdiction, the Post compared those of a similar nature or wording.
Under the proposed legislation, those who commit treason, insurrection, sabotage in collusion with an external force or incite a member of the Chinese armed forces to mutiny could face life imprisonment.
Hong Kong Article 23 bill has life sentence for crimes such as treason, insurrection
Treason carries a penalty of life imprisonment across many jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada, Australia and Singapore. The latter three also carry the same penalty for crimes similarly defined to insurrection.
In the United States, the crime of insurrection or rebellion carries a 10-year jail term, but those found guilty of treason can be sentenced to death.
Similar to Hong Kong’s proposal, conducting sabotage on behalf of a foreign power under the UK’s National Security Act 2023 also carries life imprisonment. In Australia, the penalty is 25 years’ jail.
Many US states have their own laws criminalising the destruction of critical infrastructure. In Texas, such an offence is considered a third-degree felony which carries up to 10 years’ imprisonment.
Singapore was the only jurisdiction examined which also has life imprisonment for inciting a mutiny. Other jurisdictions with similar offences have penalties ranging from seven years to 14 years.
Other penalties outlined in the Article 23 legislation also fall somewhere between ends of the spectrum.
The proposed Hong Kong law caps the penalty for espionage at 20 years’ imprisonment, while those found guilty of the offence in the US face the death penalty. In New Zealand, the penalty is 14 years’ imprisonment.
The proposed “misprision of treason” – when someone fails to disclose knowledge of a treasonous offence – will carry a possible jail sentence of 14 years.
While the crime exists in most common law jurisdictions, penalties vary widely. In the US, for example, the maximum penalty is seven years, whereas in Australia it can lead to life imprisonment.
Stiffer penalties for sedition under new Hong Kong Article 23 bill
In some cases, Hong Kong’s penalties are substantially lower than elsewhere.
The maximum penalty for receiving or organising drilling involving an external force is five and 10 years respectively under Hong Kong’s proposed law.
By comparison, anyone found guilty of providing or taking part in military‑style training involving foreign governments in Australia faces 20 years’ imprisonment.
Entering a prohibited place without authority will lead to a jail term of two years in Hong Kong, whereas a similar offence places the maximum penalty at 14 years in the UK if the action is found to be “prejudicial” to the country.
Sedition in the proposed security legislation appears to be out of sync with other jurisdictions’ punishments for it.
Under the draft legislation, the penalty in Hong Kong will be raised from the current two years’ imprisonment to seven years, with a possible 10 years imprisonment if there is collusion with an external force. It also removes the current requirement of “[inciting] persons to violence”.
Public interest defence, tough collusion stance floated for Hong Kong security law
Mark Daly, a Hong Kong-based human rights lawyer, said he had “great concern” over the proposed penalties, noting that UN experts had called for such offences to be repealed.
The offence of sedition has been repealed in many common law jurisdictions, including New Zealand, the UK and Singapore, over the past two decades. A 2010 amendment to Australia’s criminal code replaced the term “sedition” with “urging violence”.
In Canada, offences related to sedition, including uttering seditious words and seditious libel, remain in the criminal code and carry a penalty of up to 14 years’ imprisonment, although they have largely fallen out of use.
“[Hong Kong’s move] is inconsistent with international and common law developments and will have deleterious effects on freedom of expression,” Daly said.
