Hong Kong court rejects government-requested ban on protest song 'Glory to Hong Kong'
A Hong Kong court has rejected a ban on broadcasting or distributing the protest song “Glory to Hong Kong,” in a landmark decision that rejected a challenge to freedom of expression in the city
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A Hong Kong court rejected a government-requested ban on broadcasting or distributing the protest song “Glory to Hong Kong," in a landmark decision that rejected a challenge to freedom of expression in the city.
The song was written during mass protests against the government in the Chinese territory in 2019 and its lyrics call for democracy and liberty. The song has since been mistakenly played at several international sporting events instead of China’s national anthem, “March of the Volunteers.”
Judge Anthony Chan on Friday refused to grant the ban, which would have targeted anyone who uses the song to advocate for the separation of Hong Kong from China. In seeking the court order, the government also sought to ban actions that use the song to incite others to commit secession and to insult the national anthem, including such acts carried out online.
Critics had said a ban would have a far-reaching impact on the city's freedoms of expression and information, which have become increasingly threadbare under Beijing's crackdown on the city's pro-democracy movement.
Hong Kong, a former British colony, returned to Chinese rule in 1997 and was promised it could keep its Western-style civil liberties intact for 50 years after the handover. But a Beijing-imposed National Security Law and other changes since the 2019 protests have shrunk the openness and freedoms that were once hallmarks of the city.
Chan said the court considered whether an injunction would provide any greater deterrence than existing criminal law, and its potential chilling effect.
“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,” Chan said in the ruling.
The city's secretary for justice sought the injunction last month after the song was mistakenly played as the city’s anthem at international events. And a mix-up in an ice hockey competition in February resulted in the city's top sports body reprimanding the Hong Kong Ice Hockey Association, which appealed for forgiveness for what it called an “independent and unfortunate” event.
The Hong Kong government has tried to push Google to display China’s national anthem as the top result in searches for the city’s anthem instead of the song but to no avail.
Google told the government to present a court order proving the song violated local laws before it could be removed, according to Secretary for Innovation, Technology and Industry Sun Dong. The government therefore decided to deal with the matter by legal means, he said in an interview with a local broadcaster.
Google did not reply to a request for comment on its earlier exchanges with officials.
The government said the lyrics contain a slogan that could constitute a call for secession. The song was already banned at schools.
The government said it respected freedoms protected by the city's constitution “but freedom of speech is not absolute."
“The application pursues the legitimate aim of safeguarding national security and is necessary, reasonable, legitimate, and consistent with the Bill of Rights,” it said in a statement last month.
The 2019 protests were sparked by a proposed extradition law which would have allowed Hong Kong criminal suspects to be sent to the mainland for trial. The government withdrew the bill, but the protesters widened their demands to include direct elections for the city’s leaders and police accountability.