British Think Tank Warns of China's Extraterritorial Lawfare; Taiwanese Face Greater Risks
The British think tank China Strategic Risk Institute (CSRI) has released a report on the risks posed by China's extraterritorial lawfare to Taiwanese people and international businesses. The report warns that even UK companies could be pressured by Beijing to provide information related to Taiwanese individuals under China's 'long-arm jurisdiction' and 'cross-border repression' strategies.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: May 13, 2026 at 21:26
- 🔍 Collected: May 13, 2026 at 21:32 (5 min after Published)
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: May 14, 2026 at 01:00 (3h 28m after Collected)
Central News Agency
(Central News Agency reporter Chen Yun-yu, London, May 13) The British think tank 'China Strategic Risk Institute' (CSRI) today released a report analyzing the risks posed by China's escalating extraterritorial lawfare to businesses in various countries. The report's author, James Jennion, points out that even companies within the UK could be compelled by Beijing to cooperate with cross-border repression against Taiwanese people based on Chinese law.
Extraterritorial Lawfare refers to a regime using law as a weapon, attempting to apply domestic laws to individuals and entities abroad. Its core concepts include 'long-arm jurisdiction,' 'cross-border repression,' and 'cross-border enforcement,' such as Beijing or Hong Kong authorities using direct or indirect means abroad to monitor, intimidate, coerce, or attack specific individuals, establishing 'underground police stations' overseas, and offering rewards to citizens of various countries who assist authorities in apprehending exiled dissidents.
James Jennion, a Senior Fellow at CSRI and former advisor to the UK Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee, told the Central News Agency that there have been precedents of Beijing authorities monitoring (including surveillance and intelligence gathering) Taiwanese citizens overseas, and Chinese laws on cross-border data transfer leave many gray areas, giving authorities ample room for interpretation. If UK companies have business operations or commercial interests in China (including Hong Kong), regardless of whether the company is located within China, they could be pressured by Beijing to provide information related to Taiwanese individuals.
The CSRI report recommends that companies thoroughly analyze their exposure to China's lawfare. Jennion points out that even though the UK has strict data protection regulations, pressure and demands from China can be very subtle, making it difficult to supervise and hold accountable both Chinese actions and foreign companies' cooperation with China.
The report calls on the British government to develop action guidelines to help businesses respond to Chinese demands and fulfill their responsibilities to stakeholders such as customers and employees.
As planned, CSRI will brief government departments and parliaments in different countries on its research findings. Central News Agency obtained the report content, which will be published on CSRI's official website later today, in advance.
The report lists 15 Chinese regulations that provide a basis for China's extraterritorial lawfare and emphasizes that companies in various countries will increasingly face a dilemma in 'compliance,' i.e., how to simultaneously comply with or 'harmonize' the conflicts between Chinese and their national regulations or 'international standards.'
Beijing's aggressive expansion of long-arm jurisdiction and cross-border enforcement also poses risks to companies and other entities located outside China.
Another phenomenon that has attracted much attention in recent years is how China uses its influence over international organizations, platforms, and even think tanks to promote 'international standards' favorable to Beijing.
It is worth noting that the vaguely defined and extremely broad concept of 'maintaining national security' is not only a common pretext for China to implement extraterritorial lawfare but its impact has also transcended political, diplomatic, and personal security fields, thereby eroding efforts by various governments and companies to 'de-risk' from China, including reducing reliance on China for supply chains, diversifying production facilities outside China, and sanctions imposed by various governments on Chinese entities based on clear national security reasons.
The report points out that China's newly introduced regulations in recent years, including the first 'State Council Regulations on Industrial Chain Supply Chain Security' issued in March this year, provide a legal basis for Beijing to punish foreign companies attempting to 'de-risk' from China.
In addition, in April this year, the Chinese State Council issued the 'Regulations on Countering Improper Extraterritorial Application of Foreign Laws,' to counter what Beijing claims are 'long-arm jurisdiction' and discriminatory treatment implemented by other countries against Chinese citizens and entities, and to counteract damage to China's 'national sovereignty, security, and development interests' by other countries.
The regulations also introduce an 'unreliable entity list' that can be used to retaliate against companies that implement Western sanctions against China, such as those from the US and EU. China's retaliatory measures include asset freezes and effectively excluding companies from the Chinese market.
CSRI specifically mentions the risks posed by China's lawfare to Taiwan.
CSRI gave an example to Central News Agency, stating that China can use relevant legal means to obstruct Taiwan's measures to diversify risks in trade and investment, such as reducing production or supply chain activities within China or expanding factory setups outside China.
CSRI analyzes that Beijing authorities could characterize such moves by Taiwan as 'threatening China's industrial security.'
In addition to targeting Taiwanese companies, several legal documents issued by China throughout history, including the judicial opinions jointly released in June 2024 by various Chinese judicial system organs, the Ministry of Public Security, and the Ministry of State Security, commonly known as 'Punishing Separatists 22 Articles' or 'Anti-Taiwan Independence 22 Articles,' provide an increasingly assertive legal basis for Beijing authorities to exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction over Taiwanese citizens. Foreign companies with Taiwanese customers, employees, or funders need to be prepared to face pressure from Beijing.
Facing the challenges of extraterritorial lawfare from China, James Jennion told Central News Agency that in addition to issuing action guidelines, the British government also needs to legislate to require companies to incorporate identifying, preventing, responding to, or reducing relevant risks embedded in every aspect of their business activities into their regular operations.
Furthermore, given Beijing's repeated attempts to silence anti-Beijing individuals within the UK, the British government needs to take a tougher stance against China's relevant actions and enhance public, law enforcement, and administrative system awareness of 'cross-border repression,' and conduct more in-depth investigations into the forms of 'cross-border repression.' (Editor: Wei Shu) 1150513
Choose to stand with facts; your every sponsorship is a force guarding press freedom.
Download the Central News Agency 'First-hand News' APP to stay updated with the latest news.
Without authorization, the text, images, and audio/video on this website may not be reproduced, publicly broadcast, publicly transmitted, or utilized.
(Central News Agency reporter Chen Yun-yu, London, May 13) The British think tank 'China Strategic Risk Institute' (CSRI) today released a report analyzing the risks posed by China's escalating extraterritorial lawfare to businesses in various countries. The report's author, James Jennion, points out that even companies within the UK could be compelled by Beijing to cooperate with cross-border repression against Taiwanese people based on Chinese law.
Extraterritorial Lawfare refers to a regime using law as a weapon, attempting to apply domestic laws to individuals and entities abroad. Its core concepts include 'long-arm jurisdiction,' 'cross-border repression,' and 'cross-border enforcement,' such as Beijing or Hong Kong authorities using direct or indirect means abroad to monitor, intimidate, coerce, or attack specific individuals, establishing 'underground police stations' overseas, and offering rewards to citizens of various countries who assist authorities in apprehending exiled dissidents.
James Jennion, a Senior Fellow at CSRI and former advisor to the UK Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee, told the Central News Agency that there have been precedents of Beijing authorities monitoring (including surveillance and intelligence gathering) Taiwanese citizens overseas, and Chinese laws on cross-border data transfer leave many gray areas, giving authorities ample room for interpretation. If UK companies have business operations or commercial interests in China (including Hong Kong), regardless of whether the company is located within China, they could be pressured by Beijing to provide information related to Taiwanese individuals.
The CSRI report recommends that companies thoroughly analyze their exposure to China's lawfare. Jennion points out that even though the UK has strict data protection regulations, pressure and demands from China can be very subtle, making it difficult to supervise and hold accountable both Chinese actions and foreign companies' cooperation with China.
The report calls on the British government to develop action guidelines to help businesses respond to Chinese demands and fulfill their responsibilities to stakeholders such as customers and employees.
As planned, CSRI will brief government departments and parliaments in different countries on its research findings. Central News Agency obtained the report content, which will be published on CSRI's official website later today, in advance.
The report lists 15 Chinese regulations that provide a basis for China's extraterritorial lawfare and emphasizes that companies in various countries will increasingly face a dilemma in 'compliance,' i.e., how to simultaneously comply with or 'harmonize' the conflicts between Chinese and their national regulations or 'international standards.'
Beijing's aggressive expansion of long-arm jurisdiction and cross-border enforcement also poses risks to companies and other entities located outside China.
Another phenomenon that has attracted much attention in recent years is how China uses its influence over international organizations, platforms, and even think tanks to promote 'international standards' favorable to Beijing.
It is worth noting that the vaguely defined and extremely broad concept of 'maintaining national security' is not only a common pretext for China to implement extraterritorial lawfare but its impact has also transcended political, diplomatic, and personal security fields, thereby eroding efforts by various governments and companies to 'de-risk' from China, including reducing reliance on China for supply chains, diversifying production facilities outside China, and sanctions imposed by various governments on Chinese entities based on clear national security reasons.
The report points out that China's newly introduced regulations in recent years, including the first 'State Council Regulations on Industrial Chain Supply Chain Security' issued in March this year, provide a legal basis for Beijing to punish foreign companies attempting to 'de-risk' from China.
In addition, in April this year, the Chinese State Council issued the 'Regulations on Countering Improper Extraterritorial Application of Foreign Laws,' to counter what Beijing claims are 'long-arm jurisdiction' and discriminatory treatment implemented by other countries against Chinese citizens and entities, and to counteract damage to China's 'national sovereignty, security, and development interests' by other countries.
The regulations also introduce an 'unreliable entity list' that can be used to retaliate against companies that implement Western sanctions against China, such as those from the US and EU. China's retaliatory measures include asset freezes and effectively excluding companies from the Chinese market.
CSRI specifically mentions the risks posed by China's lawfare to Taiwan.
CSRI gave an example to Central News Agency, stating that China can use relevant legal means to obstruct Taiwan's measures to diversify risks in trade and investment, such as reducing production or supply chain activities within China or expanding factory setups outside China.
CSRI analyzes that Beijing authorities could characterize such moves by Taiwan as 'threatening China's industrial security.'
In addition to targeting Taiwanese companies, several legal documents issued by China throughout history, including the judicial opinions jointly released in June 2024 by various Chinese judicial system organs, the Ministry of Public Security, and the Ministry of State Security, commonly known as 'Punishing Separatists 22 Articles' or 'Anti-Taiwan Independence 22 Articles,' provide an increasingly assertive legal basis for Beijing authorities to exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction over Taiwanese citizens. Foreign companies with Taiwanese customers, employees, or funders need to be prepared to face pressure from Beijing.
Facing the challenges of extraterritorial lawfare from China, James Jennion told Central News Agency that in addition to issuing action guidelines, the British government also needs to legislate to require companies to incorporate identifying, preventing, responding to, or reducing relevant risks embedded in every aspect of their business activities into their regular operations.
Furthermore, given Beijing's repeated attempts to silence anti-Beijing individuals within the UK, the British government needs to take a tougher stance against China's relevant actions and enhance public, law enforcement, and administrative system awareness of 'cross-border repression,' and conduct more in-depth investigations into the forms of 'cross-border repression.' (Editor: Wei Shu) 1150513
Choose to stand with facts; your every sponsorship is a force guarding press freedom.
Download the Central News Agency 'First-hand News' APP to stay updated with the latest news.
Without authorization, the text, images, and audio/video on this website may not be reproduced, publicly broadcast, publicly transmitted, or utilized.