June 11, 2019
Hong Kong’s Proposed Extradition Law Amendments
Two proposed changes to Hong Kong’s extradition law
Why propose the FOO amendments?
sparked demonstrations by an estimated one million
marchers on June 9, 2019. If adopted, the changes could
The HKSAR government has offered two reasons to amend
make anyone—including U.S. citizens—residing in,
the FOO. The first broad reason is to allow extradition of
visiting, or transiting Hong Kong vulnerable to
people to “other parts of the People’s Republic of China”
investigation by or extradition to mainland China, raising
(PRC), including Macau, mainland China, and Taiwan. The
concerns about possible political prosecutions.
second specific reason is to permit the extradition of a Hong
Kong permanent resident to Taiwan to face trial for the
On April 3, 2019, Hong Kong’s Chief Executive Carrie
alleged murder of his girlfriend while they were vacationing
Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor submitted to the city’s Legislative
in Taiwan in February 2019.
Council (Legco) proposed amendments to the Fugitive
Offenders Ordinance (FOO) that would permit—for the
How would extradition requests from mainland China be
first time—extradition of alleged criminals from Hong
administered under the proposed amendments?
Kong to mainland China, the Macau Special Administrative
The FOO amendments would change how the HKSAR
Region (Macau), and Taiwan. In addition, the Hong Kong
government can extradite people to jurisdictions with which
Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) government seeks
the HKSAR does not have an extradition agreement. Under
to amend its Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters
the current FOO, the HKSAR government must ask Legco
Ordinance (MLAO) to include mainland China, Macau, and
for permission to consider such an extradition request. The
Taiwan. Legco is scheduled to consider possible
FOO amendments create a new “special surrender
amendments starting on June 12, and will take a final vote
arrangement” that eliminates the need to obtain Legco’s
on the bill no later than June 20, according to Legco
approval, including extradition requests from mainland
President Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen.
China.
What is the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance (FOO)?
Why eliminate the Legco’s role in the extradition process?
The FOO establishes the process by which the HKSAR
The HKSAR government has expressed concern that Legco
government administers extradition requests from other
members may reveal details of any pending extradition
governments, including those with which the HKSAR has
request, possibly leading to the flight of the accused or
an extradition agreement (such as the United States). It also
undermining the prosecution of the case. It also has stated
specifies which types of crimes are eligible for extradition.
that the Legco review is unnecessary and time consuming
as the Chief Executive’s review of the case provides
sufficient protection of the accused’s rights.
Table 1. Extradition Provisions of Hong Kong’s Fugitive Offenders Ordinance (FOO)
Existing FOO compared to proposed amendments, as submitted on April 3, 2019

Existing FOO
Amended FOO
Coverage
Governments with which
Any other governments
Governments with which
Any other governments
the HKSAR has an
(excluding Mainland
the HKSAR has an
(including Mainland China,
extradition agreement
China, Macau, and Taiwan)
extradition agreement
Macau, and Taiwan)
Crimes
46 types of violent and
46 types of violent and
46 types of violent and
37 types of violent and
Subject to
commercial crimes with
commercial crimes with
commercial crimes with
commercial crimes with
Extradition possible sentence of 1 year possible sentence of 1 year possible sentence of 1 year possible sentence of 3
or more
or more
or more
years or more (see Note)
Role of
None
Pass legislation to permit
None
None
Legco
HKSAR to enter into a
special extradition
arrangement
Source: CRS analysis
Notes: Excludes crimes pertaining to bankruptcy and insolvency; acts of corporate officers; security and futures trading; intel ectual property
rights; environmental pol ution and public health; export or import controls and international fund transfers; use of computers; taxes or duties;
and false or misleading trade descriptions.
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

Hong Kong’s Proposed Extradition Law Amendments
Should U.S. citizens be concerned?
Some Hong Kong business leaders and politicians support
the FOO amendments, indicating that the amendments
The FOO applies to anyone physically in Hong Kong,
address an unwarranted exclusion of “other parts” of the
regardless of nationality or length of stay. If the FOO
PRC from the extradition process and provide adequate
amendments are adopted, any U.S. citizen residing in,
legal and human rights protection to the accused.
visiting, or transiting through Hong Kong could be
extradited from Hong Kong to mainland China. In addition,
How has the Trump Administration responded?
if the MLAO amendments are approved, PRC security
officers could request that HKSAR security officers assist
On May 16, 2019, Secretary Pompeo “expressed concern
criminal investigations against U.S. citizens, including
about the Hong Kong government’s proposed amendments
conducting searches of suspects’ homes or businesses. The
to the Fugitive Ordinance law, which threaten Hong Kong’s
State Department estimated that there were 1,300 U.S.
rule of law.” A petition on the White House’s “We the
firms and 85,000 U.S. residents in Hong Kong in 2018.
People” webpage urging the U.S. government “voice
opposition” to the FOO amendments received more than
Does the United States have an extradition agreement with
100,000 signatures on June 3, 2019, thereby requiring the
Hong Kong?
White House to respond within 60 days.
Yes, that agreement sets the terms for extradition requests
What has the PRC government said?
between Hong Kong and the United States, which are then
administered in Hong Kong in accordance with the FOO.
The PRC’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong held a meeting
with Hong Kong leaders on May 17, 2019, explaining that
Why was China excluded from the original FOO?
the FOO amendments will allow China to prosecute corrupt
mainland officials and entrepreneurs who have fled to Hong
Legco passed the FOO in March 1997, four months before
Kong. The PRC government also has accused the United
the United Kingdom transferred sovereignty over Hong
States, the European Union and other governments that
Kong to the PRC. According to Hong Kong’s last colonial
have expressed views on the issue of interfering in China’s
Governor Chris Patten and others, China was intentionally
“internal affairs,” and claims that “the opposition camp and
excluded from the FOO because its legal and judicial
its foreign allies” had “hoodwinked” Hong Kong residents.
systems were not up to international standards. Chief
Executive Lam has claimed, however, that the exclusion of
How has Taiwan’s government reacted to the issue?
China from the FOO was an oversight.
The Taiwan government has stated it will not seek Chan’s
Do the current FOO and/or the proposed amendments
extradition under the amended FOO, as it implies that
protect people from false or politically-based charges, or
Taiwan is part of the PRC.
human rights abuses after extradition to mainland China?
How has Chief Executive Lam reacted to the public
The current FOO, as well as the proposed amendments,
response to the proposed FOO amendments?
include some safeguards, such as prohibiting the extradition
of a person for “an offence of a political character” or for
“the purpose of prosecuting or punishing him [sic] on
On June 10, 2019, Lam stated she will go ahead with the
submission of the FOO amendments on June 12, 2019, as
account of his [sic] race, religion, nationality, or political
opinions.”
planned. She had previously indicated that she would
It also prohibits the extradition of people who
propose changes in the bill to raise the minimum sentence
were convicted in abstentia, or where the sentence could be
to seven years or more for the “special surrender
the death penalty.
arrangements.” In addition, she has said that additional
administrative safeguards would be adopted and made
Opponents fear the PRC will use the extradition process to
legally binding, including only considering extradition
persecute or falsely imprison its critics. Analysts point to
requests from China’s top judicial authorities.
the cases of Swedish national Gui Minhai, Canadians
Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, and U.S. citizens Kai
What options does Congress have?
Li and Sandy Phan-Gillis as potential examples of China’s
willingness to use false or misleading criminal charges for
If they wish to take action on the issue, Members,
political reasons.
individually or collectively, could issue statements on the
FOO amendments. Congress also could pass a resolution
How have people in Hong Kong reacted to the proposed
expressing its views on proposed extradition changes.
FOO amendments?
Alternatively, Congress could consider legislation regarding
U.S. policy in Hong Kong, similar to the Hong Kong
On June 9, 2019, according to the protest organizers, 1.03
Human Right and Democracy Act of 2017 (H.R. 3856, S.
million people—or nearly 14% of Hong Kong’s total
417, 115th Congress). Congress could also organize a
population—joined a march opposing the extradition
delegation to visit Hong Kong to express its views of the
amendments (the Hong Kong Police’s official estimate was
extradition legislation and other issues of concern. Hearings
240,000 people). The Hong Kong Bar Association and the
could be conducted on the subject, as well.
Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce have come out
against the amendments, as has the American Chamber of
Commerce in Hong Kong and Hong Kong’s International
Michael F. Martin, Specialist in Asian Affairs
Chamber of Commerce.
IF11248
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

Hong Kong’s Proposed Extradition Law Amendments


Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11248 · VERSION 1 · NEW

---