Observers have noted that the new rules governing travel to and from China will further strengthen government control over the country’s citizens, the BBC reports.
Citizens deemed to have harmed China’s national security or interests while traveling abroad could face a three-year ban on leaving China upon their return. Exit bans may also be imposed on those who have violated laws regarding technology imports and exports.
Chinese authorities have stated that the new regulations are intended to safeguard national security and sovereignty, denying that the travel rights of ordinary citizens will be restricted. Meanwhile, critics argue that the new rules could expand Beijing’s ability to exert pressure on its citizens’ activities abroad. Professor Tom Kellogg, Executive Director of the Center for Asian Law at Georgetown University, described the measure as another tool designed to control what Chinese citizens say and do while overseas.
The professor noted that, in some instances, the government simply refuses to issue a passport to prevent criticism of the state or to punish involvement in human rights activities. Under regulations taking effect on the 15th of September,
Chinese citizens may be barred from leaving the country if they have violated technology import and export rules,
thereby threatening national industrial and technological security. A statement published last week on Piyao, the Chinese government’s rumor-debunking platform, clarified that the new rules do not restrict the travel rights of ordinary citizens; instead, they serve as a preventive measure targeting destinations deemed high-risk and individuals with unusual travel patterns.
The regulations were reportedly introduced to address issues such as people being lured out of the country or becoming involved in illegal gambling and fraudulent activities abroad.
At the same time, some Chinese citizens have reported facing unclear travel restrictions in recent years. A 26-year-old Chinese citizen known as Pipi told the BBC’s Chinese service that his passport application was rejected in 2023. He believes this was linked to his participation in pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong in 2019. According to Pipi, he was interviewed by Hong Kong media during the protests and was subsequently questioned by China’s State Security police upon returning home. An immigration official reportedly stated that the passport was denied because of Hong Kong, though no written confirmation was provided. Pipi added that had the refusal been issued in writing, it could have been appealed; instead, the only response he received was that he could not travel anywhere. He did not argue the matter, as he did not want to end up in prison.
According to publicly available information,
Chinese citizens currently have no way to check for themselves whether an exit ban has been imposed on them.
Unless a written notice is issued or they are informed verbally, citizens usually only learn of an exit ban when applying for travel documents or when actually setting out on a journey.
China’s Administrative Licensing Law stipulates that if authorities decide not to issue a document, the reasons must be explained in a written response. However, some individuals interviewed by the BBC stated that this requirement is not being enforced.
The human rights group Safeguard Defenders informed the BBC that Chinese authorities have significantly increased the number of exit bans in recent years. In 2016, the Chinese Supreme Court’s database contained only 89 records of exit bans, but last year that figure rose to 188,760.
The new regulations also mandate that
border control officials should advise citizens against traveling to “high-risk” countries.
However, Chinese citizens—ranging from government officials and state-owned enterprise employees to ordinary citizens—were already facing restrictions on travel to certain countries. A man working at a state financial institution in Beijing, using the pseudonym Xiao Wang, said that colleagues were required to surrender their passports and had to obtain permission before traveling. Managers regularly reminded them that “sensitive” countries, such as Japan, were not to be considered as destinations at all.
Other friends of Xiao who are civil servants—even those working in museums—are effectively unable to travel anywhere, having been told that their employment status makes it impossible to apply for a passport.
Kellogg described the travel restrictions as “very alarming” and stated that they reflect increasing ideological control.
Read also: 9/11 – spies, strategy, missed opportunities and lessons learned