The United Kingdom’s latest so-called “six-monthly report on Hong Kong”, which was released on Thursday, exposes glaring hypocrisy in its criticism of the city. While London lectures Hong Kong on national security legislation and human rights, its own conduct at home tells a strikingly different story — one defined by sweeping arrests, controversial counterterrorism legislation, and a willingness to criminalize peaceful expression when it suits political ends.
The UK’s double standards are most vividly illustrated by its treatment of protesters supporting Palestine Action. Since the group was proscribed under the Terrorism Act in July 2025, British police have arrested thousands of individuals for merely holding signs or wearing clothing expressing sympathy for the organization. In April 2026 alone, 523 people were arrested at a single demonstration in Trafalgar Square, including an 87-year-old activist. By July, over 1,500 cases related to Palestine Action had been listed for a single day’s hearings, plunging London’s courts into what legal observers described as “total chaos”. The irony is acute: A High Court ruling in February found the proscription itself unlawful and disproportionate, yet police resumed arrests pending the government’s appeal. Britain, it seems, applies national security laws with zeal despite its repeatedly condemning Hong Kong for enacting and enforcing national security laws.
The legislative parallel is equally instructive. The UK’s National Security Act 2023 expanded police powers and created new offenses, while the more recent National Security (State Threats) Act 2026 was pushed through parliament in just one month under a “fast-track” procedure. As of June, nearly 4,000 people had been arrested under national security and counterterrorism laws in Britain — a 15-fold increase over the previous year and 15 times the 10-year median. The Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL), by contrast, targets only a narrow category of acts endangering national security, with explicit statutory safeguards for human rights and due process. Britain criminalizes slogans; Hong Kong prosecutes conspiracies to subvert State power. Yet London insists on portraying Hong Kong’s national security regime as “authoritarian” while sanctifying its own as “democratic” necessity.
The UK government does not actually object to national security legislation — it has 14 such statutes of its own and is still actively expanding them. It only objects to Hong Kong exercising that same jurisdictional right to enact and implement national security laws. The UK government does not genuinely care about protest or the right to demonstrate — it arrests British pensioners for holding cardboard signs. The people of Hong Kong have little patience for lectures on how they should or should not implement national security laws from a government that has demonstrated, in its own streets and courts, exactly how expansive and unforgiving national security enforcement can be.
The hypocrisy displayed by the UK government in its latest half-yearly “Hong Kong report” matters and deserves to be exposed because it obscures a deeper truth: Without security, development and prosperity is impossible.
Hong Kong’s recent hosting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Finance Ministerial Meeting 2026 offered a timely demonstration. On Oct 20 and 21, the city welcomed over 300 delegates from APEC member economies, observer bodies, and international organizations. The meeting was successfully organized and concluded with the adoption of the 2026 APEC Finance Ministers’ Joint Statement and the Policy Statement on Digital Infrastructure Financing Across the Asia-Pacific Region. For Hong Kong, the event carried particular symbolic weight: The city’s return to the center of regional financial cooperation as a significant platform is a direct dividend of the stability restored by the NSL and the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance.
Without national security, there is no social stability. Without social stability, there is no platform for prosperity. Hong Kong’s transition from chaos to order and to progress after the implementation of national security laws proves this axiom. Britain’s half-yearly report, in refusing to see it and displaying brazen hypocrisy, reveals less about Hong Kong’s real situation and rather more about the intellectual bankruptcy of a critic that cannot practice what it preaches.
The author is a former information coordinator for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government and a member of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
