Divided Loyalties: The Rise of Informants Under Hong Kong's National Security Law

Innes Tang, a former banker, has reported numerous Hongkongers under the controversial national security law, claiming to represent community interests. This article explores the implications of his actions and the broader atmosphere of fear and self-censorship in a city that has seen significant political changes since the law's enactment.

Innes Tang, a former banker turned national security informer, has triggered a wave of reports against fellow Hongkongers under the controversial national security law (NSL). With a self-funded hotline established to collect tips on potential infringements, Tang believes he is safeguarding his community from actions that could threaten national stability. Reports of seemingly innocuous activities, such as flying colonial-era flags or selling protest-themed baked goods, have resulted in dozens being reported to authorities.

The backdrop of these actions is a city grappling with the changes imposed following its return from British to Chinese rule in 1997. The NSL, enacted in response to the 2019 pro-democracy protests, criminalizes acts labeled as "secession," "subversion," and "collusion with foreign forces." The law has sparked widespread criticism for stifling free speech and press freedom, leading to the emergence of a culture of informing.

Tang asserts that his motivation stems from a deep-seated love for Hong Kong, echoing sentiments shaped when he was young and the city was still under colonial rule. He perceives a need to restore a balance in societal opinions, portraying himself as a voice for the "silent majority" who reject independence movements. However, the consequences of his informant activities are palpable. Reports to the police have escalated sharply since the NSL's introduction, with significant numbers of arrests and an exodus of residents seeking a more favorable political environment.

The impact of this surveillance culture extends beyond those directly reported; it permeates the community, instilling fear and encouraging self-censorship among academics and activists. Observers like Kenneth Chan, a political scientist, recount a shift where friendships and careers are strained due to perceived political affiliations. The government maintains that it prioritizes academic freedom but also emphasizes adherence to legal responsibilities.

Despite the repressive atmosphere, some like Tang hope for engagement beyond local borders, taking their narratives to international platforms. His transition into a spokesperson for pro-Beijing non-profits highlights a complex reality where patriotism is often conflated with surveillance and suppression of dissent.

For those in Hong Kong like Chan who navigate this precarious landscape, the future remains uncertain. With friends and colleagues imprisoned or in exile, the consequences of the NSL continue to shape personal and political lives in ways that remain deeply unsettling for many. The Hong Kong government insists that its actions are aimed at a minority that threatens overall stability, yet the dark shadow of the NSL lingers over a city once known for its vibrant dissent.