The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) recently released the “China Targets” investigation report, which is part of their inquiry. As part of the investigation, ICIJ and its partners consulted with 10 European governments on policies to address cross-border repression. European officials are urging member states to enhance cooperation to collectively curb China’s transnational repression.
The investigation findings reveal that there is insufficient information sharing among EU member states and a dispersal of data within local law enforcement agencies, making it challenging to effectively combat cross-border repression.
Engin Eroglu, the head of the European Parliament’s delegation responsible for China relations, expressed to ICIJ, “Currently, information on cross-border repression is scattered among law enforcement agencies with inadequate coordination. Without cooperation between these institutions, it is difficult to determine the severity of cross-border repression methods, as they often do not violate local laws.”
European parliamentarian Hannah Neumann conveyed via email to ICIJ, “The EU must establish clear red lines, backed by criminal investigations, sanctions, and diplomatic consequences, to demonstrate that fundamental rights are non-negotiable.”
The U.S.-based NGO Freedom House characterized the Chinese government’s transnational repression efforts as the “world’s most complex and far-reaching repression operation.”
In countries like France, Austria, and Denmark, intelligence agencies have indicated their responsibility for monitoring suspected cases of cross-border repression and consider them as foreign interference.
Last month, three Danish politicians from different parties told ICIJ partner Politiken that Denmark and other European governments should take more measures to protect targets of Chinese transnational repression seeking refuge in these countries.
A spokesperson for the Romanian Ministry of Interior stated that the government has not yet provided a specific definition of cross-border repression nor classified it as a crime.
Representatives from the governments of Germany, Finland, and Belgium disclosed that they do not retain statistical data on cross-border repression.
A spokesperson from the Finnish Ministry of Justice told ICIJ partner YLE that the government views cross-border repression as “refugee espionage,” where foreign governments gather information to control or intimidate their overseas citizens. The department stated it has the latest case information but has not provided relevant training to its staff.
The Belgian Foreign Ministry spokesperson informed ICIJ partner De Tijd that Belgian intelligence agencies maintain contact with civil society organizations to understand the overall trend of cross-border repression occurring within the country, noting that the intensity of these actions seems to have increased in recent years.
An ICIJ partner in Sweden, Göteborgs-Posten, tracked threats and intimidation against a Chinese human rights activist and their teenage son linked to individuals associated with the Chinese government.
However, Swedish authorities did not respond to requests for comments regarding “how the government is addressing cross-border repression.”
A spokesperson from the Slovenian Ministry of Justice informed ICIJ’s partner Oštro that handling cross-border repression is not within the ministry’s scope of responsibilities, and the Ministry of the Interior and Human Rights Commissioner stated they have no knowledge of this phenomenon.
Neumann’s report submitted to the European Parliament in 2023 highlighted that while the EU has issued “important political signals” through statements and public condemnations, its response measures remain “fragmented” and urgently require strengthening.
In addition to urging member states to coordinate efforts, both Eroglu and Neumann suggested that the European External Action Service (EEAS), responsible for the EU’s foreign relations with non-EU countries, should take a more proactive stance when dealing with authoritarian governments.
In March, the EEAS released the 2025 report on “Information Integrity and Countering Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference,” identifying China’s persistent “cross-border information suppression” as one of the most concerning aspects of foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) faced by the EU.
Neumann emphasized that the EEAS’s diplomatic contacts and strategies tend towards passive measures and should provide greater support to human rights defenders, who are often victims of cross-border repression.
Eroglu also urged the EEAS to “further raise the issue of persecuting human rights defenders in various meetings with authorities.”