Global Freedom of Expression

16 October

The Power of Song: Repercussions for Freedom of Expression and Digital Rights in Hong Kong

  • 9:00am-10:30am ET; 8am CDT; 2pm BST; 8pm ICT
  • Online Event

 

Earlier this year, a Hong Kong Court banned the dissemination of “Glory to Hong Kong,” a popular protest “anthem,” which had become an important symbol of dissent in Hong Kong. Between 2019 and 2022, the song was regularly used by protesters in over 400 demonstrations, and versions of it were erroneously promoted as the national anthem of Hong Kong, leading to arrests and prosecution for illegal activities and sedition. The song was available through online music streaming platforms, receiving millions of views. In 2023, the Secretary for Justice sought an injunction to prevent the “broadcasting, performing, printing, publishing, selling, distributing, displaying, or reproducing the song with the intent to incite secession or seditious intention, as defined by NSL (National Security Law) and the Crimes Ordinance in Hong Kong.”

The case highlights the struggle within the Hong Kong judiciary to hold on to its independence in the face of immense pressure from the Chinese authorities. Last year, the Court of First Instance dismissed the application, finding that despite the fundamental importance of national security, the injunction was not necessary and balanced unfavorably against individual rights. However, in May 2024, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Court of Appeal justified the use of a civil injunction as necessary to assist the criminal law in safeguarding national security, deferring to the executive’s assessment of the risks posed by the song. The use of a civil injunction as a mechanism to apply the National Security Law made compliance by the online platforms to take down the content more justifiable. 

This is just one example among many others brought against those protesting the crackdown on fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong by the Chinese authorities. In June 2024, two foreign Non-Permanent Judges in Hong Kong from the United Kingdom resigned over concerns that their role in the Hong Kong judicial system made them not only complicit in the prosecution of protesters and other human rights activists but also lent credibility to the crackdown. The erosion of the legal system continues in Hong Kong, with the first two criminal prosecutions for sedition under the new Safeguarding National Security Ordinance being handed down on September 19.

Join us on Wednesday, October 16, for the webinar “The Power of Song: Repercussions for Free Speech and Digital Freedoms in Hong Kong.” Our panel of experts will delve into the court’s decision to block the protest song and the impact of the National Security Law. Speakers include Michael Caster, Asia Digital Program Manager with ARTICLE 19, who has published widely on these issues, and Chung Ching Kwong, a political and digital rights activist from Hong Kong. Dr. Eric Yan-ho Lai, Research Fellow at Georgetown Center for Asian Law (GCAL), will also discuss the findings of a research paper on how the “Glory to Hong Kong” decision benefited the government’s national security governance and enabled excessive restrictions on freedom of speech. The panel will be moderated by Doreen Weisenhaus, Director of the Media Law and Policy Initiative at Northwestern University, former media law professor at the University of Hong Kong, and author of Hong Kong Media Law: A Guide for Journalists and Media Professionals.

The webinar is co-sponsored by the Georgetown Center for Asian Law and ARTICLE 19.

Eric Yan-ho Lai, Research Fellow, Center for Asian Law Georgetown University

Eric Yan-ho Lai is a research fellow at Georgetown Center for Asian Law (GCAL), an associate fellow at the Hong Kong Studies Hub of the University of Surrey and a member of the Asian Civil Society Research Network. He obtained  his Ph.D in law at SOAS University of London in 2022. His main research focuses on law and society, law and social movement, national security, judicial politics and international human rights law. Lai is formerly a visiting fellow at the Centre for Comparative and Public Law at the University of Hong Kong, and formerly visiting researcher at King’s College London. Born and raised in Hong Kong, Lai has been involved in civil society development and human rights advocacy since 2010. 

 

Chung Ching Kwong, Senior Analyst at Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China

Chung Ching Kwong is a political and digital rights activist from Hong Kong. She is the founder and former spokesperson of Keyboard Frontline, an organization dedicated to monitoring online censorship and digital rights, and a columnist at Apple Daily, a pro-democracy newspaper with one of the largest readerships in Hong Kong before being shut down. Glacier first got involved in activism in 2012 due to Hong Kong’s proposal of a copyright amendment bill that would undermine freedom of speech on the internet. She has vocally criticized the use of surveillance technology and artificial intelligence to pursue authoritarian ends by the Chinese regime. Kwong is the Hong Kong Campaigns Coordinator at the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) and is now pursuing her Ph.D. in law at the University of Hamburg, where she lives in exile.

 

Michael Caster, Asia Digital Program Manager ARTICLE 19

Michael Caster is a human rights advocate and researcher specializing in China and Southeast Asia. He is currently the Asia digital program manager with ARTICLE 19, where he manages projects on internet freedom and digital rights. In 2016 he co-founded Safeguard Defenders, a regional human rights organization with a focus on China, and with whom he continues to serve as senior advisor. Michael previously worked with Civil Rights Defenders. In 2008, he was a co-founder of the Chinese Urgent Action Working Group in Beijing, until the organization was crippled in 2016 in a country-wide crackdown on the human rights movement. He consults with the Minority Rights Group, Amnesty International, the International Commission of Jurists, and others. He holds degrees in international law and human rights from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands.

 

Doreen Weisenhaus, Associate Professor and Director, Media Law and Policy Initiative, Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications, Northwestern University

Doreen Weisenhaus is a Senior Lecturer with a joint appointment at Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law and the Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing, where she also serves as Director of the Media Law and Policy Initiative. Her courses include Global Freedom of Expression and the Press (Pritzker), The Journalist Abroad: Legal Risks and Dilemmas (Medill), and Media Law and Government Transparency Practicum (a joint law-journalism offering). Prior to Northwestern, she taught media law and ethics at the University of Hong Kong (2000-2017), where she remains an Adjunct Associate Professor at the Journalism and Media Studies Centre. Weisenhaus is also the author of Hong Kong Media Law: A Guide for Journalists and Media Professionals. Before HKU, she was City Editor of The New York Times and the first legal editor of The New York Times Magazine before becoming its law and politics editor.

Related Cases from the Global Freedom of Expression Database

Case of “Glory to Hong Kong” Song
Decision Date: May 8, 2024
The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Court of Appeal allowed the government’s appeal and granted an interim injunction prohibiting the broadcasting, performing, printing, publishing, selling, distributing, displaying, or reproducing of the song 願榮光歸香港 or “Glory to Hong Kong” with the intent to incite secession or sedition. The Court accepted the executive’s assessment that the song posed a national security threat and that an injunction was necessary to prevent unlawful activities related to the song, in addition to criminal prosecutions. The ruling emphasized the Court’s duty to safeguard national security while ensuring the injunction did not unjustifiably interfere with freedom of expression through clarity, proportionality, and adherence to the scope of criminal law. The Court also addressed concerns about the injunction’s “contra mundum” effect, stating that safeguards were in place for affected individuals to challenge or seek variations to the order.

HKSAR v. Chung Man
Decision Date: September 16, 2024
The West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court sentenced Chung Man to 10 months imprisonment for multiple charges of sedition, with portions of sentences for Counts 2 and 3 to be served consecutively to Count 1. The case involved incidents between March and April 2024 where the Defendant wrote various political slogans including “Hong Kong Independence,” “Liberate Hong Kong, Revolution of Our Times,” and derogatory comments about police officers on upper deck bus seats. After being identified through CCTV footage and caught discarding a double-ended pen used for writing the slogans, Chung Man was arrested and admitted to writing the messages, claiming he did so to exercise freedom of speech and conduct a “social experiment.” The Court rejected Chung Man’s defense of impulsive action, citing evidence of premeditation through his consistent carrying of writing tools. The Court emphasized the increased gravity of sedition offenses following the March 2024 legislative changes. While acknowledging the Defendant’s guilty plea as a mitigating factor reducing the initial 12-month sentence, the Court maintained that the repeated nature of the offenses and their impact on national security warranted consecutive sentencing.

HKSAR v. Chuo Kai
Decision Date: September 16, 2024
The West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court found Chuo Kai, the Defendant guilty of sedition based on his guilty plea. The case involved Chuo Kai, who was arrested on June 12, 2024, for wearing a shirt with pro-democracy slogans and a mask with the acronym ‘FDNOL’, symbolizing political demands. The Court considered Chuo Kai’s actions as premeditated, noting that he deliberately chose to wear the inflammatory attire on a date significant to demonstrators. The court emphasized the seriousness of the offense, stating that Chuo Kai’s actions posed a risk to social order by potentially reviving unrest and undermining the governance of Hong Kong. The Court rejected Chuo Kai’s claim of acting spontaneously and stressed the preventive nature of the law in discouraging actions that could incite public unrest and endanger national security.

HKSAR v. Chu Kai Pong
Decision Date: January 4, 2024
The West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court sentenced Chu Kai Pong to 14 months in prison for making a statement with seditious intent under Hong Kong’s National Security Law. The case concerns Chu who was found wearing T-shirts and carrying items with slogans like “Free Hong Kong” and “Restore Hong Kong: Revolution Now” at Hong Kong International Airport, on his way to Taiwan. The Court emphasized the seriousness of his actions, which were seen as advocating for Hong Kong’s secession from China. While making references to previous cases on sedition and national security, the Court rejected defense arguments that minimized the offense’s gravity, noting that such actions could incite social chaos.

Eric Yan-Ho Lai
‘Glory to Hong Kong’ ban sets a chilling precedent, Op-Ed, The Hong Konger, June 5, 2024.
“The Judiciary” in Contemporary Hong Kong Government and Politics, Lam, WM, PL Lui and W Wong (eds), Hong Kong: HKU Press (2024).
Resistance through the Cracks: Understanding Hong Kong’s Rule by Law and Resistance in the Courtroom in Comparative Perspective [在夾縫中抵抗:從依法治國與司法抗爭的比較經驗看香港], Taiwan: SpringHill Publisher (2024).
Hong Kong’s Legal War on a Protest Anthem, Op-Ed, The Diplomat, August 1, 2023.

Michael Caster

What Leverage Remains to Preserve Free Expression in Hong Kong?, Tech Policy Press Podcast, February 29, 2024.

Global Tech Companies’ Deafening Silence on Deteriorating Internet Freedom in Hong Kong, Op-Ed, The Diplomat, February 29, 2024.

ARTICLE 19 Statements

Hong Kong: Internet intermediaries must resist censorship of protest anthem, June 15, 2023.

Hong Kong: Tech companies must challenge protest song injunction, June 21, 2023.

Hong Kong: Tech companies must speak out against internet censorship, March 11, 2024.

Hong Kong: Tech companies must resist ban on protest anthem ‘Glory to Hong Kong’, May 8, 2024.

Hong Kong: UK Distributor should reverse global censorship of pro-democracy anthem, June 4, 2024.

Hong Kong: Proposed critical infrastructure bill is a fresh assault on free expression online, July 29, 2024.

Reuters

Hong Kong protest anthem removed by distributor after court injunction, May 24, 2024.

The Global Network Initiative

GNI Statement on Hong Kong’s Protest Anthem Ban, May 27, 2024.

Congressional Executive Committee on China (CECC)
Chairs Ask Google to Restore Censored Hong Kong Protest Anthem, June 5, 2024.