China’s new cybersecurity law sparks fresh censorship and espionage fears
Legislation raises concerns foreign companies may need to hand over intellectual property and help security agencies in return for market access
China adopted a controversial cybersecurity law on Monday that it said would tackle growing threats such as hacking and terrorism but has triggered concern from foreign business and rights groups.
The legislation, passed by Chinas largely rubber-stamp parliament and set to come into effect in June 2017, was an objective need of China as a major internet power, a parliamentary official said.
Overseas critics argue it threatens to shut out foreign technology companies and includes contentious requirements for security reviews and for data to be stored on servers in China.
Rights advocates also say the law will tighten restrictions on Chinas internet, already subject to the worlds most sophisticated online censorship mechanism, known outside the country as the Great Firewall.
Yang Heqing, an official on the National Peoples Congress standing committee, said the internet was already deeply linked to Chinas national security and development.
China is an internet power, and as one of the countries that faces the greatest internet security risks, urgently needs to establish and perfect network security legal systems, Yang said at the close of a bimonthly legislative meeting.
More than 40 global business groups petitioned the Chinese premier, Li Keqiang, in August, urging Beijing to amend controversial sections of the law. Chinese officials have said it would not interfere with foreign business interests.
Contentious provisions remained in the final draft of the law issued by the parliament, including requirements for critical information infrastructure operators to store personal information and important business data in China, provide unspecified technical support to security agencies, and pass national security reviews.
Those demands have raised concern within companies that fear they would have to hand over intellectual property or open back doors within products in order to operate in Chinas market.
READ Goodbye Obama, hello Trump: how will the presidential handover work?
Powered by Inline Related Posts
James Zimmerman, the chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, called the provisions vague, ambiguous, and subject to broad interpretation by regulatory authorities.
Human Rights Watch said elements of the law, such as criminalising the use of the internet to damage national unity, would further restrict online freedom.
Despite widespread international concern from corporations and rights advocates for more than a year, Chinese authorities pressed ahead with this restrictive law without making meaningful changes, Sophie Richardson, China Director at Human Rights Watch, said in an emailed statement.
Zhao Zeliang, a director at the Cyberspace Administration of China, said every article in the law was in accordance with the rules of international trade and that China would not close the door on foreign companies.
They believe that [phrases such as] secure and independent control, secure and reliable, that these are signs of trade protectionism. That they are synonymous. This is a kind of misunderstanding, a kind of prejudice, Zhao said.
Many of the provisions had been previously applied in practice, but their formal codification coincides with Chinas adoption of a series of other regulations on national security and foreign civil society groups.
The laws adoption comes amid a broad crackdown by President Xi Jinping on civil society, including rights lawyers and the media, which critics say is meant to quash dissent.
Last year, Beijing adopted a sweeping national security law that aimed to make all key network infrastructure and information systems secure and controllable.
Chinas government has come to recognise that cyberspace immediately and profoundly impacts on many if not all aspects of national security, said Rogier Creemers, a researcher in the law and governance of China at Leiden University in the Netherlands.
It is a national space, it is a space for military action, for important economic action, for criminal action and for espionage, he said.