0
A promotional poster extensively publicizing China's new ethnic unity law, which is scheduled to take effect on the 1st. This legislation is viewed as a de facto codification of the "One China" principle. / Courtesy of The Beijing News

China's new ethnic unity law, which prioritizes the use of the Chinese language among ethnic minorities and penalizes acts of ethnic separatism, is set to officially take effect on the 1st of next month. The legislation can be viewed as a de facto codification of the "One China" principle. As anticipated, Chinese authorities have stepped forward to assert the legitimacy of the law's extraterritorial application. According to reports from media outlets including The Beijing News on the 25th, Vice Minister of Justice Hu Weilie addressed the extraterritorial provisions during a press conference held at the State Council Information Office the previous day, stating that it is a normal legislative activity carried out by a sovereign state in accordance with the law, and that it fully complies with the basic principles of international law.

Passed in March during the fourth plenary session of the 14th National People's Congress, the law scheduled for implementation on the 1st of next month aims to strengthen a sense of shared community among all Chinese citizens, including the 55 ethnic minority groups.

In particular, Article 63 of the law stipulates that organizations or individuals outside China's borders can be held legally accountable if they commit acts that undermine ethnic unity and development or incite ethnic separatism. Consequently, concerns are rising within Taiwan that this law will be utilized as a legal basis to target individuals who support Taiwanese independence or oppose Beijing's unification policies. Certain Western media outlets in the United States have similarly criticized the legislation as a regressive law that suppresses minority rights and forces cultural assimilation.

Regarding these criticisms, Vice Minister Hu expressed discomfort, noting that some Western media outlets have recently distorted Article 63 of the law, disparaging it as an abuse of jurisdiction. He pointed out that such views are neither objective nor aligned with the spirit of jurisprudence, asserting that nations worldwide possess the right to prevent separatism and subversive acts through legislation to maintain social integration and public order.

He further explained that the extraterritorial clause is designed to prevent various illegal ethnic-related activities taking place abroad, and reassured that it will not impact normal personnel exchanges, academic discussions, or economic and trade cooperation, thereby actively emphasizing the legitimacy of the legislation.

Nevertheless, voices of protest continue to echo across Taiwan. For instance, Taiwan's Central News Agency cited local scholars and civil society representatives, reporting that the law could expose Taiwanese citizens to severe legal and political risks. Individuals who frequently travel across the Taiwan Strait for employment, investment, or family matters are expected to be the first affected, with prospects that scholars, journalists, civic groups, and current affairs commentators could easily be targeted as well. Taiwan appears poised to immediately label the statute as a malicious piece of legislation.

                                                                                                          Hong Soon-do