FREE now and never miss the top politics stories again. SUBSCRIBE Invalid email Sign up fornow and never miss the top politics stories again. We will use your email address only for sending you newsletters. Please see our Privacy Notice for details of your data protection rights.

In a letter signed by UK religious leaders, including former archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, senior clerics urged the British government to take “concrete action” to protect the city's “high degree of autonomy and fundamental freedoms” But, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) government on Thursday denied the allegations and said that it attaches the utmost importance to and firmly upholds human rights and freedoms in Hong Kong. The SAR government objected to the letter’s claims that the people of Hong Kong have endured suppression of their basic freedoms and human rights in their “fight for justice and democracy” and that they have been "routinely subjected to police brutality and state repression" in the last six months.

But, it would seem that human rights is now a subjective term, after China organised an international forum on December 11 where representatives of many countries, including oppressive regimes such as Iran, North Korea, and Syria, signed up to Beijing’s own declaration of human rights. Now there are two measures to determine human rights abuses, the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human rights, and Beijing’s “alternative version”. Article 8 of China’s new document states that “the international community’s concern for human rights matters should always follow the international law and the universally recognised basic norms governing international relations, of which the key is to respect national sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in the internal affairs of states.” So this means that even if a state does not respect the very minimal human rights standards of the Beijing Declaration, others are not allowed to protest and interfere in its “internal affairs.”

The shadow of Beijing falls over Hong Kong's police department

Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin

This adds legal weight to the Hong Kong government’s rejection of the letter sent to Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab that urged for action to protect Hong Kong’s citizens from human rights violations and “the increasing persecution and imprisonment of Christians and the demolition of churches in China, the internment of more than a million Uighur Muslims, the continued oppression of Tibetan Buddhists”. The (CCP) Communist Party of China’s ‘Beijing Declaration on Human Rights’ could be seen as a viable alternative to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for those who do not like it. It may be attractive to a number of non-democratic countries, both for its content and for its ideological basis. Massimo Introvigne, managing director of the Centre for Studies on New Religions, describes the subtext behind Article 3 of China’s declaration in the human rights magazine Bitter Winter. READ MORE: South China Sea: Russia and China's colossal military challenge to US

Xi Jinping

Article 3 of the declaration states that “the right to subsistence and the right to development” are the basic human rights and all the other human rights come after these two. Mr Introvigne points out that, “this may sound nice, but in fact isn’t. “It implies that, in the name of development, rights such as freedom of expression, freedom of the media, religious liberty, and democratic rights may be crushed. “To eliminate any possible doubt, the preamble makes an explicit reference to the thought of President Xi Jinping, which is precisely based on the idea that development and stability are more important than freedom. DON'T MISS Trade war over: Trump says signing deal with China is IMMINENT (LATEST)

South China Sea standoff: US vs China naval power compared (ANALYSIS)

World War 3: How US nearly sparked China-Soviet nuclear war (INSIGHT)

Xi Jinping

Article 5 of the Chinese version distinguishes between human rights and their exercise. While the notion of human rights is “inalienable,” their exercise may be restricted as “determined by law,” on the basis of “the legitimate needs of national security, public order, public health, public safety, public morals and the general welfare of the people.” Mr Introvigne describes the “general welfare of the people” in totalitarian regimes as being determined by the ruling parties and their leaders, who also define the scope of “national security, public order, public health, public safety, public morals”. So, that Article 5 means that in practice, all forms of exercise of human rights may be denied by the authorities.

Xi Jinping and Jair Bolsonaro