According to a report by human rights group Safeguard Defenders, China’s government is using exit bans to silence activists, intimidate foreign journalists and pressure targeted individuals to return to China to face investigations. The report states that there has been an increase in politically targeted exit bans in the past five years, and new laws have made the situation even harder to manage. Seven new laws and regulations have been enacted or amended in 2018 or later that provide for exit bans. Exact data on exit bans is not available, but the number of times they were mentioned in the Supreme People’s Court’s official database rose eightfold between 2016 and 2020.
Exit bans are restrictions on individuals, preventing them from leaving the country. They have been used to serve a wide range of purposes, including punishing human rights defenders, controlling ethnic-religious groups and engaging in hostage diplomacy. According to the report by Safeguard Defenders, at least tens of thousands of people in China are currently subject to exit bans, with foreign nationals increasingly being ensnared by them.
The increased use of exit bans and detentions of foreign and domestic executives has heightened concerns among the international business community. Foreign business groups have warned that Beijing’s changes to its counter-espionage law may increase the risk of arbitrary exit bans against their executives. The tightening of security measures by President Xi Jinping has been blamed for the expansion in the use of the bans.
This month, China has increased the use of exit bans, preventing individuals from leaving the country. Reuters has also warned that the recent upswing in bans indicates that they are being used to put pressure on people to return to China. Between 2016 and 2022, the number of cases mentioning bans increased by eightfold. In total, 56 foreign citizens were prevented from leaving the country between 1995 and 2019. China’s Ministry of Public Security has yet to comment on the accusations.
Although most cases involving exit bans relate to civil rather than criminal action, the lack of official data on the number of exit bans means that at least tens of thousands of Chinese nationals are likely subject to them. The Madrid-based rights group Safeguard Defenders has warned that the local laws governing the regulatory procedure of exit bans are “vague, ambiguous, complex and expansive” and impossible to appeal. The American Chamber of Commerce has called the issue a “matter of serious concern for the investor community”.
In conclusion, the increase in the use of exit bans by China is alarming, and until the matter is addressed by the government, the international community will continue to be concerned. The lack of data and clarity surrounding these regulations creates a troubling environment for individuals based in China and foreign executives doing business in the country. The matter calls for increased action from relevant international organizations to hold China accountable for its actions.
