The Rise of Informing in Hong Kong: A Citizen's Watchdog Perspective

Innes Tang has become a significant figure in Hong Kong since the implementation of the National Security Law, reporting numerous citizens for alleged infractions. He describes his actions as community-police cooperation aimed at restoring societal order and reflects on the broader implications of reduced civil liberties and rising government scrutiny in the city.

Innes Tang, a former banker, has instituted a personal hotline funded by himself to facilitate the reporting of suspected national security violations in Hong Kong. His vigilant approach stems from observing what he believes are serious infringements on the newly imposed National Security Law (NSL). From activists waving colonial-era flags to bakers selling cakes adorned with protest symbols, Tang has been proactive in reporting dozens of fellow citizens to the police.

Tang describes his mission, stating, “We’re in every corner of society, watching to see if there is anything suspicious that could infringe on the national security law.” He and his volunteers monitor social media, gathering evidence of anyone they believe contravenes the NSL, implemented by Beijing to quell unrest following 2019’s protests.

Critics argue that the NSL, which targets acts of secession, subversion, and collusion with foreign forces, has fostered a climate of fear, stifling free speech and public discourse. Since its enactment, over 300 arrests have been made related to national security offenses, leading many residents to flee Hong Kong permanently.

Tang believes that community activism can work alongside police efforts, declaring, “Does reporting work? We wouldn’t do it if it didn’t.” His motivations arise from a sense of loyalty to Hong Kong, cultivated during his youth under British colonial rule. He reflects that his desire to restore “balance” to society led to his heightened civic engagement, emphasizing that the public should not become overly involved in politics.

However, this has sparked tensions with other citizens who view public demonstrations as a vital part of political expression in a city that has seen a drastic reduction in such activities. Scholars like Kenneth Chan express concern, noting how the current environment has driven friends and colleagues away for fear of association, with some being labeled as "radioactive" due to their pro-democracy views.

Meanwhile, the Hong Kong government has insisted on the importance of academic autonomy while enforcing compliance with national laws, which may stifle critical discourse. The government continues to promote that its policies target only those posing real threats to national security, assuring that they aim to protect the general populace.

Despite the strained landscape, Tang maintains that he wants to challenge the existing system, expressing unease over a legislative council where extreme measures become normalized. As the number of protests dwindles to almost none, the self-censorship within academia grows, fostering a politically tense atmosphere where dissent is increasingly fraught.

Now, Tang’s focus has shifted to international engagements, with plans to represent pro-Beijing groups at the UN in Geneva while establishing a media company in Switzerland. Meanwhile, Chan and others remain skeptical about the future, grappling with the loss of friends to exile and imprisonment.

In a world where expression grows precarious, both Tang and Chan underscore the importance of addressing the evolving state of civic engagement, patriotism, and freedom in Hong Kong's rapidly changing political climate. As Tang concludes, the path for many remains unclear, with the repercussions of the NSL echoing throughout the fabric of Hong Kong society.