on Wednesday, a court agreed with the Hong Kong government and banned a well-liked protest song. This decision has raised worries about the loss of freedoms in Hong Kong, which used to be a place with lots of freedom.
Protestors sang “Glory to Hong Kong” during big protests against the government in 2019. The song was played by mistake instead of China’s anthem at sports events, which made city officials upset.
The last time a song got banned in the city was in 1997 when Britain gave control back to China.
Critics believe that banning the song limits freedom of speech, especially since Beijing has been cracking down on Hong Kong after the 2019 protests. They also said that the ban could cause problems for big technology companies and make the city less attractive for businesses.
Judge Jeremy Poon said the composer meant for the song to be a strong and emotional tool for some people in the city.
“He said that just prosecuting criminals is not enough to solve the serious criminal problems. We also need to have a court order to stop them from doing illegal activities. ”
He said the court order was needed to get internet companies to take down videos connected to the song that were causing problems. The operators said they will agree to the government’s request if there is a court order.
The ban would affect anyone who shared or spread the song to support Hong Kong breaking away from China. It would also make it against the rules to do anything that makes the song seem like the national anthem in order to disrespect it.
The song can be played for news reporting and school work.
Not following the court order could be seen as disrespecting the court and could mean getting a fine or going to jail.
In the past, the police arrested some people for playing the song in public for other reasons, like playing a musical instrument in public without permission. This was reported by the local news.
By Wednesday afternoon, the song “Glory to Hong Kong,” by an artist named “Thomas and the Hong Kong people,” was still on Spotify and Apple Music in both English and Cantonese. I looked on YouTube for the song and found lots of different videos and versions.
Google said in an email to the AP that it is looking at the court’s decision. Spotify and Apple did not say anything right away.
George Chen, who helps lead the digital practice at The Asia Group, a business and policy company in Washington, said it would be best for tech companies to limit access to the content in question in a specific area to follow the order.
Chen asked the government to think about how to help people feel less worried about the order’s impact on speaking freely.
He said he hoped that these bans won’t become common and set a standard. “He said this will make people very worried about how free Hong Kong’s internet will be tomorrow. ”
In 2020, Beijing made a new law to stop the long-lasting protests and keep the country safe. That rule was used to capture lots of the city’s top democracy supporters. In March, the city made a new security law that was from within the city. This made people more worried that the city’s Western-style freedoms could be reduced even more. The two laws usually focus on very bad crimes.
After the decision was made, Lin Jian, a spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry, said it is important for the city to maintain national security by preventing people from using the song to cause division and disrespect the national anthem.
Paul Lam, the person in charge of legal matters in Hong Kong, said the court order was not meant to stop internet service providers from working as usual. He said the government will tell the providers to take down the related content as ordered by the court.
Lam said that the things the ban stops could be seen as crimes even without the court order. He also said that the ban only covers a few things.
However, Eric Lai, who works at Georgetown Center for Asian Law, said that while it’s normal for courts to trust the government when it comes to national security in other places, the court has not been able to make sure that citizens’ basic rights, like free speech, are still protected.
“He said it’s disappointing that they agreed to use lawsuits to help enforce the national security law. ”
Amnesty International said the injunction was a pointless attack on freedom of speech and goes against global human rights laws.
Sarah Brooks, who is the China Director for Amnesty International, said that the government’s recent win in the appeal court, after losing the case last year, is a concerning sign. It shows that the government is becoming more unwilling to protect human rights and fulfill their responsibilities.
Brooks asked leaders to stop trying to limit people’s rights in the name of keeping the country safe.
Last year, the government took Google to court because Google refused to show China’s national anthem as the first result when people searched for the city’s anthem. Instead, Google displayed a protest song. Last July, a court said no to their first request. Many people saw this as a setback for officials who wanted to stop the protestors.
The government’s appeal said that if the president thinks a rule is needed, the court should approve it unless it won’t do anything. This information comes from a legal paper on the government’s website.
The government told schools to stop playing the protest song. It used to say it followed the rules in the city’s constitution, but it also said that freedom of speech has some limits.