Strategy Insights Ep 99: A New Era of Extraterritorial Rule: China's Authoritarianism Goes Global..

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to Professor Ming's Strategic Insights. Last time we called attention to the announcement and implementation of Beijing's new law, which is called the Ethnic Unity and Progress Promotion Act, and was going to be effective on July the 1st. And we also mentioned how it received some criticism around the world. But little did we know, two days later, on July the 3rd, they made another move. This time it's done by what they call the CAC, Cyberspace Administration of China. And the new law is called Administrative Measures on Internet Information Services, short as AMIS, which is a draft. But this time it's not only a draft, it's not only a simple revision. It's a great expansion. The original version of these administrative measures contained only 27 articles. But this time the new draft is expanded to 94 provisions or 94 articles, so more than three times. So that's something that caught our attention. The second thing that caught our attention is it does contain some provisions or articles that have some extraterritorial effects. So as we see it, these two laws complement and strengthen each other. So that brings up the first question, why such a big expansion from 27 articles to 94? The simple answer is there have been some new advancements or developments in technology, in the internet technology and in the semiconductor technologies and so on and so forth. So in the eyes of Beijing, that increased so many new loopholes that have to be covered. So that's the first reason for the expansion. Let me just give you a few examples. For example, Article 90, they expand the definition of the carrier. In the past, the measures deal with the supplier or the provider of the internet services. But this time, they expand the definition of the coverage of the providers. They include providers of search engines, applications, and instant messaging services. And that's Article 90. And Article 26, anybody who tries to circumvent the official internet censorship without proper authorization will be subject to legal liabilities. To put it simply, the new law or the new measures put more and more emphasis upon not only just the providers, but also at users and the contents shared by users. For instance, for the users, whatever you post, you share, or you make comment on, could be judged or could be monitored by the relevant authorities. Whatever they don't like, you'll be subject to legal punishment. So that means almost everything can be included in these two laws. But the biggest change of this new law, of this new administrative measures, lies in Article 29. Didn't I mention the extra-territorial jurisdiction? This Article 29, this newly added Article 29, aims exactly at this. It goes roughly like this. Anybody who's making, producing, broadcasting, sharing, or posting outside of the territory of the People's Republic of China, which is considered as dangerous or harmful to the national security or public interest of the People's Republic, can be sued or can be held legally liable. So this is actually echoing what we mentioned, the extra-territorial jurisdiction article in the so-called Ethnic Unity and Progress Promotion Act. If you're still not sure what I'm talking about, let me give a quick review about this Ethnic Unity, Progress, and Promotion Act. Actually, they're using nationalist rhetoric to cloak the Chinese Communist Party in the identity of the Chinese nation. As we mentioned before, Article Number Two of this law, it says the business of the Ethnic Progress, Unity, or whatever, must hold on or insist the comprehensive leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. That's Article Number Two. Article Number Twenty, it says we must lead the underage people, Chinese people, or to educate to dearly love the Chinese Communist Party. That's Article Twenty. Article Twenty-first, it says we must regulate and we must lead or guide the Hong Kong people, or the Macau people, or the Taiwan patriots, or even overseas Chinese to do the same thing, as we mentioned before. So that means all the ethnic Chinese will be included or will be covered by this law. Secondly, who will be charged with this kind of responsibility? Educational systems, institutions, media, enterprises and businesses, families, social organizations, and all the religious organizations, be they temples or churches or whatever. You all must carry out the responsibilities. The problem with this kind of law is the language is so vague. It's not well defined. It's not what we call the proper usage of legal terms. They sound more like casual charges, prompt up charges, or shifting red lines, whatever you call it, as we raised Mr. Jimmy's last case in his court defense in July. So that's really troublesome. Furthermore, there are several principles contained in this law, in this ethnic unity law. First, it seems to have a retroactive jurisdiction. This law can hold individuals legally accountable for their speeches, conduct, and even identity. That's the first thing unacceptable to us. The second point is, in Prohibition, or in Article 54, it goes like this. The citizens of People's Republic of China have the right to file a complaint or file a report about any conduct or speeches which they consider undermining the national unity or national progress. So that means they can snitch on anybody. Or as we see it, they're actually encouraging their citizens to snitch on each other. That is to say, it doesn't matter whether you're an ethnic Chinese or you're a foreigner, an alien, you're Caucasian, you're black, or you're Latino, whoever, whatever. That doesn't matter. And you live outside of China, anywhere in the world, and you post something or you share something on platforms like X, Facebook, or Instagram, anything. As long as Beijing doesn't like it and they think that's harmful to the national identity, national unity, or even national progress, anything that they don't like, then you're violating the law. You have committed a crime. They can sue you and they can chase you down and they can repress you. And that's exactly what they want. Although they are not capable of doing that as of now, but that's actually what they're thinking and what they're intending to achieve sometime in the future. Let me give you a few concrete examples. The first one is the flood. The flood in Guangxi province, in one of the southern provinces in China, next to Guangdong and to the west side of Canton, Guangdong city. There's a big flood. And there are some people who lost their houses, lost their homes, or even their family members in the flood. And they try to post some photos or some videos or whatever, or even a comment about this flood and about the whole situation. That may be illegal and that's committing a crime. So anything that has to do with the flood, you have to go by the official statements or go by the news released, published by the government. As long as you do it by yourself, you are violating the law. And for the news agencies, for the foreign news agencies, such as CNN, VOA or BBC, even if you are just reporting this news, you may be violating the law of the People's Republic of China. And that's how bad it can be. The second example is the big fire. The fire at the Weng Fog Court in Tai Po, New Territories, Hong Kong. It happened on November the 26th, 2025, last year. The fire lasted about 48 hours, a little bit less than two days. It was eventually put out. And eventually, the government said there were altogether 168 people killed in the fire and 79 people injured. But the survivors thought the casualty was definitely much higher than that. Some even said more than 2,000 people. But government said there's only 168 people killed in the fire. And I remember that picture very clearly, a survivor who ran out from the house, an older man. He was looking at the fire at the building and he said, well, my family members are still in there. I'm not sure whether they could survive this fire or not. And after that, he covered his mouth and said, when I'm saying this, am I violating the national security law of Hong Kong? That's exactly what I saw. So you can imagine how strict or how severe the laws or the repression can be in Hong Kong or mainland China, should it be extended to anywhere outside of their own territory. You can imagine that. Before I conclude, let me remind you, anything that has to do with articles, papers, photos, videos, comments, or even reaction memes can be considered illegal if Beijing considers it harmful to their national security or whatever. So that means with a combination of these two laws, Beijing can actually expand their jurisdiction to anywhere in the world and to anybody in the world, if they have the power or if they have the capability to do it. And let me remind you, they want that. And that's something that we have to be vigilant about. Well, that's all I want to share with you today. I hope you like it. And please keep that in mind. And let's be vigilant. Well, do remember to click the icon bell and share with your friends and subscribe to our program if you haven't done so. Okay, I'll see you next time.