In the chart below, I have annotated our translation of the new Implementation Rules in the right-hand column. Cells in Gray are less important, YELLOW are somewhat important, and those in RED are the most important.
Much of the new implementation rules is aimed at integrating other laws into the implementation of the 2014 Counter-espionage Law. A few provisions, however, expand the scope or range of of state security powers , some of which may prove important. No provisions introduce new limitations on the exercise of authority.
Most important is the expansion of the scope of state security powers in investigating non-espionage related acts of subversion. A new list in article 8 of the Rules goes far in explaining what situations the broad investigative powers apply to, including religious activity seen as threatening national security.
Article 21 revises the Law’s rule that one is only punished for refusing to hand over evidence against someone one ‘knows’ is conducting espionage when requested to do so by authorities. This knowledge requirement is now met where the state security tells you the person is committing espionage.
Article 22 includes the refusal to provide assistance to counter-intelligence work as a means of intentionally obstructing that work, punishable by up to 15 days administrative detention with no court trial.
Article 6 expands prohibited ‘funding’ of espionage conduct, to include funding those that are carrying out espionage conduct, even if the funding isn’t used for that purpose. There is no requirement on its face that the funder must know the group is conducting espionage.