HK police can now demand phone passwords under new national security rules

Hong Kong has expanded enforcement tools tied to national security cases, including a new ability for police to require access to electronic devices from people suspected of national security-related offenses.

The changes were published in the government gazette on Monday through amendments to an existing bylaw, and they introduce criminal penalties for failing to comply.

What changed in the rules

Under the amendments, refusing to unlock a phone or computer when required can be punished by up to one year in prison and a fine of HK$100,000 (about US$12,700).

The updated provisions also set a higher maximum penalty for giving false or misleading information, with a potential sentence of up to three years’ imprisonment.

How the changes were introduced

Chief Executive John Lee announced the amendments, and the move did not go through approval by Hong Kong’s Legislative Council.

The government has framed the measures as necessary to prevent and punish conduct viewed as threatening national security.

Broader enforcement scope beyond police

The amendments also extend authority for customs officials, who can now seize items considered to have “seditious intention.”

These steps further widen enforcement capacity linked to the National Security Law, which was introduced in 2020.

Context: the National Security Law since 2020

The National Security Law sets out offenses including secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion with foreign forces.

It also allows for some proceedings to be held behind closed doors, a feature that has drawn attention because it can limit public access to parts of the judicial process.

Who has been affected so far

Since the law took effect, hundreds of pro-democracy protesters, activists, and former opposition politicians have been arrested under its framework.

Recent prominent cases cited in public discussion include the father of an activist being jailed over an attempt to cash an insurance policy, and media owner Jimmy Lai receiving a 20-year sentence under the law on charges that included foreign collusion and publishing seditious material.

Market and political relevance

For businesses and investors, the immediate operational issue is compliance risk: the amendments create explicit penalties tied to device access and information provided during investigations.

At the same time, the scope of what qualifies as a national security matter remains central to how widely these powers may be used, and the source material does not specify thresholds, procedural safeguards, or how frequently the new powers are expected to be applied.

Limits and uncertainties

The amendments set maximum penalties, but the available information does not detail enforcement guidelines, oversight mechanisms, or how disputes over access demands would be handled in practice.

Critics have argued the law and its expanding tools are aimed at limiting dissent; that characterization is contested and is not presented here as a confirmed intent.