Judge refuses Hong Kong government’s request for injunction against Glory to Hong Kong, saying it could have chilling effect
Hong Kong’s high court has rejected a government attempt to ban a protest song, Glory to Hong Kong, saying an injunction could create a chilling effect and undermine freedom of expression.
The government had sought the injunction banning online publication or distribution of the song, arguing it insulted China’s national anthem and could give people the impression that Hong Kong was an independent country.
The song became an unofficial anthem after the 2019 pro-democracy protests and ensuing government crackdown. Its Cantonese lyrics integrated a key protest slogan – “break now the dawn, liberate our Hong Kong; in common breath, revolution of our times” – and was widely adopted by protesters.
There is growing intolerance for any slogans, statements or paraphernalia that supported the pro-democracy movement. People have been arrested and some prosecuted for playing the song in public, possessing or holding Hong Kong independence flags, and shouting pro-independence slogans.
“I am unable to see a solid basis for believing that the invocation of the civil jurisdiction can assist in the enforcement of the law in question,” Judge Anthony Chan said in his ruling.
In a press summary attached to the judgment, Chan said the court had a duty to “protect human rights, which included freedom of expression, when acting to safeguard national security”.
Chan said the application sought an injunction “against everyone in Hong Kong and in aid of criminal law”, but the court was not satisfied that would be “of real utility”. He said acts endangering national security were already punishable “under a robust criminal regime”.
He also warned of potential chilling effects in granting an injunction. “Innocent people might be discouraged from legitimate activities involving the song for fear of the severe consequences of breaching the injunction,” he said.
A ban on the song’s publication would have had broader implications for international tech companies such as Google, which the government has sought to pressure into removing the anthem from search results when people look for “Hong Kong national anthem”.
Hong Kong’s security secretary, Chris Tang, said in December that Google had refused to intervene, saying search results were created by algorithms. Tang said this had “hurt the feelings of the Hong Kong people”, while the region’s chief executive, John Lee, called it an “unthinkable” response.
The song has been played – purportedly by accident – at some international sporting events, including during an international rugby sevens match. In what was described as “simple human error”, Glory to Hong Kong was broadcast instead of the Chinese national anthem before a match between Hong Kong and South Korea in Incheon. Hong Kong’s government demanded an investigation into how the song was played.
In recent months, versions of the song appeared to be removed from other streaming platforms, including Spotify and iTunes.
In May, regularly published data from Google revealed an increase in takedown requests citing national security from the Hong Kong government and police, but most were refused. Among the refused requests were seven YouTube videos that allegedly violated the national security law, three related to the protests or opposition political parties, and one to remove websites and Google Drives related to a children’s book about sheep, for which a speech therapists’ union was convicted of sedition over its publication.
Sophie Richardson, the China director at Human Rights Watch, welcomed the decision as a defence of free speech.
“The Hong Kong government should respect the decision and refrain from making further attempts to censor the protest song Glory to Hong Kong and other political expressions,” she said. “It should also stop its aggressive campaign to undermine internationally guaranteed human rights.”
Speaking before the ruling, Jaw-Nian Huang, an assistant professor at Taiwan’s National Chengchi University, said an injunction would expand Beijing’s aims to increase control in Taiwan, and further challenged “previously taken-for-granted internet freedom and open gaming rules in the online world”.
He added: “For multinational tech companies, it implies that they will continue to confront in the Hong Kong market the dilemma they have faced in the Chinese market – choosing between adhering to existing international norms of internet freedom and compromising with China’s vigorously promoted digital authoritarian governance model for the sake of economic interests in the Chinese market.”
Friday’s ruling, which appeared unexpected, quickly began trending among Hongkongers on Facebook. Some speculated the government would take it further, perhaps requesting an interpretation from the National People’s Congress in Beijing, as it has done in its efforts to have foreign lawyers barred from representing local national security clients.
Many celebrated the ruling. “Gonna sing tonight,” said one commenter.
Additional reporting by Tzu-Wei Liu and agencies
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/28/court-rejects-attempt-ban-glory-hong-kong-protest-song