The UK is ill-prepared to protect exiled dissidents, journalists and activists from the long arm of authoritarian regimes, according to a troubling new report from Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights. In its Seventh Report of Session 2024–25, the committee warns that “transnational repression” – the targeting of individuals abroad by their home governments – is an under-recognised but escalating threat, eroding the UK’s reputation as a safe haven and undermining fundamental rights.
Transnational repression, or TNR, has no formal definition in UK law, but – following the UN – the Committee describes it as a spectrum of state-directed actions beyond the perpetrating country’s borders. These range from harassment, smear campaigns, surveillance and stalking, to threats against family members, attempts to coerce individuals back to their country of origin, and, in extreme cases, assassination attempts.
It can also take the form of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) – legal actions often brought by individuals closely aligned with authoritarian regimes to harass, intimidate and financially exhaust their critics. The Committee notes that journalists are at particular risk, citing Putin’s People author Catherine Belton, pursued in the UK courts by five oligarchs and by Rosneft, the Russian state gas company. Such lawsuits are increasingly used as instruments of TNR, designed to silence those who expose or criticise repressive states.
These tactics, the report notes, violate core human rights, from the right to life to freedom of expression, assembly and association. They also create a powerful ‘chilling effect’, with fear of retaliation deterring others from expressing dissenting views and participating fully in public life.
Although the Government maintains that TNR is “specific and targeted” and does not affect “large numbers” of people, the Committee warns that the true scale is likely underestimated due to under-reporting and the covert nature of many incidents. UK-based Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Chloe Cheung – on whom Beijing has placed a HK$1 million bounty – told MPs and peers that constant threats, both online and physical, had left her on guard: “I now carry lots of self-protection devices with me… If someone suddenly tries to make friends with me or approaches me unexpectedly, my first thought is no longer trust but suspicion. I will ask myself, ‘Are they working for Chinese authorities?’”
One of the clearest illustrations of TNR is the misuse of INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” system. Designed to help police forces locate and provisionally arrest fugitives, these alerts are meant for legitimate law enforcement. Yet the Committee found they are “routinely” deployed by authoritarian states to pursue political opponents and journalists across borders. Rhys Davies, a barrister who gave evidence to the inquiry, likened Red Notices to “the sniper rifle of autocrats… long-distance, targeted, and highly effective”.
For those targeted, the consequences can be life-altering. “You will be in constant fear that, if you were to go on holiday to Spain, an overzealous passport control officer might think they have an international super-criminal… and will detain you. There is no aspect of your life that this will not touch upon,” Davies told the Committee. Individuals subject to politically motivated Red Notices may also face frozen assets and other financial restrictions. Legal experts also warn that banks often close accounts when a customer’s name appears in an INTERPOL alert. Academic studies have likewise documented how Red Notices can block employment opportunities, prevent targets from opening new accounts, jeopardise legal residency abroad, and derail visa applications.
Perhaps most troubling is that there is no requirement to inform the person targeted, with many discovering a notice exists only after it has disrupted their livelihood – or when they are detained at a border.
In the course of its inquiry, the Committee heard evidence that misuse of the system is widespread, with China, Russia and Turkey among the most prolific abusers. In China’s case, witnesses described a tactic of using Red Notices to locate dissidents abroad, followed by threats to family members to force their return. That sits alongside a broader campaign of harassment: in addition to placing bounties on exiled activists, Beijing has sent threatening letters to neighbours of targeted individuals and operated unofficial “police stations” in the UK to monitor and intimidate members of the Chinese diaspora. Similar concerns have been raised about the proposed new Chinese embassy in London, amid fears it could serve as a base for further surveillance and intimidation. In August 2025, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner asked Beijing to explain why parts of its submitted plans were redacted – particularly basement areas – and gave the Chinese government two weeks to respond.
To address these abuses, the Committee calls on the Government to work with “Five Eyes” intelligence partners to track and expose politically motivated use of Red Notices, push for corrective measures against serial abusers, and advocate greater transparency in INTERPOL’s procedures. The Home Office and National Crime Agency should also explore ways of alerting individuals when there is strong evidence a notice against them is politically motivated, giving targets time to adjust travel plans. On the domestic front, the Committee recommends training immigration caseworkers to recognise the potential misuse of Red Notices in visa applications.
Having concluded that China conducts the most comprehensive TNR campaign of any foreign state operating in the UK, the Committee warns that policy towards Beijing must reflect the scale and persistence of this threat. It further calls for the scope of the UK’s new anti-SLAPP provisions to be expanded, warning that without comprehensive protection, dissidents who expose authoritarian abuses will remain vulnerable to legal harassment, with a chilling effect on freedom of expression.
