������

A British human rights activist, barred from entering Hong Kong last week, told ������ Hong Kong he was “astonished” by the responses of the city’s government and Beijing following his refusal, with both admitting mainland authorities had intervened in the case.

Benedict Rogers, the deputy chair of the UK Conservative Party’s human rights commission, was turned back by immigration at Hong Kong International Airport last Wednesday after arriving for a private visit to the city.

Under “one country, two systems”, Hong Kong is ostensibly responsible for immigration matters.

However, in the wake of Rogers’ barring, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying, who  in Hong Kong’s “internal affairs,” said that Beijing was responsible for the city’s “foreign affairs” and could block people from entering. 

This was echoed by Chief Executive Carrie Lam , who claimed that Hong Kong retained control over immigration only insofar as “foreign affairs” were not involved.

In an email on the weekend, Rogers said he was “truly astonished” that it was openly admitted China had blocked his entry to Hong Kong, where previously lived as a resident, and rejected the claim he planned to “interfere”.

“They have admitted that China can intervene in Hong Kong’s immigration policy, which to me suggests a very grave undermining of the Basic Law and ‘one country, two systems,’ ” he said.

“To suggest that my visit was a ‘foreign affairs’ matter is absurd. I have repeatedly emphasized that I was travelling as a private citizen, in a personal capacity, intending to meet old friends and new acquaintances privately.”

“I had undertaken not to do any public engagements while in Hong Kong. I had emphasized that I was not representing the Conservative Party or any other organization and was not travelling in any official capacity. So this is absolutely not a ‘foreign affairs’ matter.”

Rogers further added that he was “shocked” that Lam could not rule out that the UK’s last colonial governor of Hong Kong Chris Patten — who has also been outspoken about the mainland’s erosion of the city’s freedoms — would not be barred in the same fashion.

“To even suggest that the former Governor of Hong Kong could be denied entry raises this whole issue to an entirely new level of seriousness and further undermines the principles of ‘one country, two systems’ and Hong Kong’s freedoms and autonomy,” he said.

Rogers has said that he was aware, via an intermediary, that the Chinese embassy in London was against his trip and had threatened to deny him entry but that he decided to “put it to the test” and visit anyway.

He called the way the matter was handled “seriously counterproductive” and damaging to China and Hong Kong.

“If they had simply allowed me to visit Hong Kong in the way I had intended, privately and quietly, it would have been so much better for all concerned. As it is, China’s increasing strangulation of Hong Kong’s freedoms has been exposed for the world to see.”

As he returned to Thailand on Wednesday after being escorted by officials to the plane before being allowed to meet with his lawyer, Rogers said he was “personally sad and profoundly concerned” about what the refusal meant for the future of Hong Kong’s autonomy.

“This whole story is not and should not be primarily about me, it should be about Hong Kong and the principles at stake,” he said.

“By denying me entry, China has sent a very clear message to the world that ‘one country, two systems’ is, if not dead, certainly dying, being decapitated with increasingly alarming speed. Of course my case is simply the most recent illustration of that.”

For the past couple of the months, the activist said he had been planning a new organization to monitor and advocate for Hong Kong’s freedoms as guaranteed under the agreement that transferred the former British colony back to China 20 years ago.

He called on the British government and international community more broadly to “speak out much more robustly for Hong Kong’s freedoms and autonomy”.