For Carmen Lau, the journey from Hong Kong to the United Kingdom was meant to be a passage to safety and freedom. Once a district councillor and a prominent pro-democracy activist, Lau fled her home city in 2021 as Beijing’s National Security Law swept through, ensnaring activists and opposition politicians in its wake. But even thousands of miles away, the shadow of repression has found her—this time, taking on a chillingly modern form.
In late 2025, Lau became the target of a disturbing harassment campaign that has sent shockwaves through both the activist community and British authorities. According to reports by The Guardian, BBC, and Mail Online, at least half a dozen neighbors in Maidenhead, Berkshire, received letters featuring digitally manipulated, sexually explicit images of Lau. The images, generated by artificial intelligence and deepfake technology, depicted her as a sex worker and included her real name, former address, and invitations for recipients to “visit.” Some letters were so graphic that recipients described them as “offering services”—a deeply humiliating and invasive fabrication.
The letters, posted from Macau—a semi-autonomous Chinese territory near Hong Kong—were not just shocking in content but also in their sophistication. As Lau explained to BBC, “The letters had a couple of very unpleasant images, AI-generated or photo-shopped, where they put my face on those images, portraying me as a sex worker.” The psychological impact was immediate and profound. “I am a woman, and they threaten me like this,” she told reporters, her voice heavy with anxiety.
This campaign marks a troubling escalation in what experts now call transnational repression: the targeting of exiled dissidents by hostile regimes, even after they have sought sanctuary abroad. The use of AI and deepfake technology has added a new, deeply personal dimension—one that disproportionately affects women. Lau articulated the gendered nature of the attacks: “When I was in Hong Kong, pro-Beijing agents were trained to use gender-based harassment targeting pro-democracy activists, but AI technology has enhanced this sort of intimidation—it is beyond just transnational repression, as a woman it is very worrying.”
Unfortunately, Lau is not alone in this ordeal. Other exiled Hong Kong activists, such as former legislator Ted Hui in Australia and lawyer Kevin Yam, have faced similar harassment. In Hui’s case, a fake poster advertising his wife as a “Hong Kong lonely housewife” sex worker was circulated in Adelaide, Australia, to an address with no actual connection to Hui. The poster listed sexual services with prices and was even emailed to Hui’s boss, demonstrating the targeted and far-reaching nature of these attacks. According to The Guardian, the email’s IP address was traced back to Hong Kong, underscoring the campaign’s international reach.
This is not the first time Lau’s neighbors have been targeted. In March 2025, they received “wanted” posters offering a HK$1 million (about £103,000) reward for information about her or for handing her over to the Chinese embassy. The letters accused Lau, a former district councillor, of inciting protests and colluding with foreign powers against Beijing. The escalation from bounties to character assassination via sexualized deepfakes has left both Lau and her neighbors shaken. One Maidenhead resident, speaking to The Guardian on condition of anonymity, described the letters as “graphic” and “unfortunate for the person who it’s targeted at.” Another recipient wondered aloud, “How did they get our address? Why did they pick us? It just doesn’t make sense.”
The official response has been swift, if not always reassuring. Thames Valley Police confirmed they are investigating “malicious communications” involving digitally altered images, actively engaging with Lau as the victim. “We are engaging with the victim and, at this time, no arrests have been made,” a police spokesperson told BBC on December 11, 2025. Meanwhile, Australian authorities have been more reticent, declining to comment on individual cases such as Hui’s.
Government officials in the UK have voiced strong condemnation. Local MP Joshua Reynolds, who first alerted Lau to the campaign after being contacted by constituents, called the incidents “acts of transnational repression without question.” He has urged the UK government to impose sanctions on officials responsible for such campaigns, stating, “We need to find out who sent these letters. Officials in Beijing need to be held accountable.” The Home Office and Foreign Office have been briefed, with a government spokesperson reiterating, “The safety and security of Hongkongers in the United Kingdom is of the utmost importance.” British authorities have also condemned the issuing of arrest warrants and bounties by Hong Kong police, vowing not to tolerate foreign intimidation on UK soil.
The Chinese embassy, for its part, has repeatedly denied responsibility. In statements to the press, officials have characterized previous bounty letters as “faked” and described the activists as fugitives “seeking to destabilize Hong Kong.” The embassy in Canberra did not respond to requests for comment. Official Chinese statements insist on the legitimacy of pursuing “wanted fugitives” and dismiss the victims’ accounts as “cheating and sadfishing.”
For Lau, the psychological toll has been relentless. She has changed homes and now avoids being recognized in public, often wearing a cap or mask. She has also criticized the initial police response, which asked her to sign an agreement not to engage in activities that might put her at risk—a move she saw as shifting responsibility to the victim rather than addressing the threat. “Many of us fled Hong Kong for freedom but even on British soil we cannot exercise our freedoms,” she told Mail Online.
Lau has also been outspoken about the UK’s approach to China, warning that a less confrontational stance by the Labour government may have emboldened the Chinese Communist Party. She expressed concern over China’s planned “mega-embassy” in London, suggesting it could serve as a base for further transnational repression: “Ministers do not care for anti-Beijing dissidents living in the UK.”
The campaign against Carmen Lau and her peers is more than a personal attack—it is a test for liberal democracies. As deepfake and AI tools become more accessible, activists, especially women, may face new vulnerabilities that outpace current legal and investigative frameworks. For now, authorities in the UK have pledged to investigate, and MPs are demanding accountability. But for Lau, the reality is one of vigilance and anxiety—a reminder that exile does not always guarantee safety.
This disturbing episode is more than a footnote in the ongoing struggle for Hong Kong’s democracy. It is a stark warning of how repression adapts to new technologies, and how the fight for freedom must, too. The use of AI-driven deepfakes in transnational harassment not only exposes gaps in legal protection but also challenges the capacity of liberal democracies to defend those who seek refuge within their borders.
As Carmen Lau and others continue their advocacy from afar, their experiences underscore the urgent need for robust protections and decisive action. The battle against transnational repression is no longer just about borders; it’s about confronting the digital tools that make intimidation possible, and ensuring that freedom—once sought—remains secure.
