Hong Kong police arrested human rights lawyer Zou Xingtong and six others on charges of posting messages with seditious intent online, in violation of the National Security Law. Taiwanese civil groups have put forward three demands, including the immediate release of the seven individuals and ceasing the suppression of events commemorating the Tiananmen Square massacre.
The Taiwan Judicial Reform Foundation issued a statement co-signed by over ten civil groups, expressing concern over the arrests made by the Hong Kong National Security Department on May 28 and 29 under the National Security Law, targeting Zou Xingtong, her mother, and five other activists on charges of “seditious intent.” The statement outlined three demands, urging the Hong Kong government to release the seven individuals and halt crackdowns on June 4 commemoration activities.
Zou Xingtong and the others were accused by the Hong Kong government of violating the National Security Law by sharing information related to the June 4 incident on the Facebook page “Small Tong Group.” However, the alleged posts merely shared experiences such as “attending June 4 events” and “visiting Tiananmen Mothers,” without advocating for the vindication of June 4 or calling for participation in related activities.
Merely sharing personal reflections should not constitute the offense of “seditious intent” intended to stoke hatred or contempt towards the Chinese Communist Party or the Hong Kong government, carrying a maximum prison sentence of up to 7 years. Furthermore, if the case is deemed to involve “collusion with foreign forces” (including Taiwan), the maximum sentence could be raised to 10 years.
Of particular concern is the provision in the law that states, “any person who possesses publications with seditious intent without reasonable excuse commits an offense,” punishable by up to 3 years in prison. This means that even ordinary Hong Kong citizens who save articles from the “Small Tong Group” page could potentially face legal persecution and imprisonment due to the government’s broad interpretation.
Civil groups are calling on the Hong Kong government to immediately release Zou Xingtong and the others, withdraw the prosecution in this case, and especially cease the long-term harassment and arbitrary deprivation of Zou Xingtong’s personal and speech freedoms. In addition to ending the unjust arrests of those involved in this case, the government should stop intimidating its people and respect their freedom to commemorate June 4 through speech and assembly.
The recent arrests highlight the international community’s doubts about the implementation of Article 23 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law. The government should comprehensively amend the National Security Law to address human rights violations.
The arrest of Zou Xingtong and the other individuals by the Hong Kong government under the National Security Law, enacted on March 23 following the implementation of the National Security Law. International warnings about the potential misuse of the law have proven true, as the government continues to tighten its grip on freedom of speech and suppress dissent, attempting to stifle the remaining voice of civil society in Hong Kong.
Within just a month of the National Security Law coming into effect, independent bookstores have closed, the Hong Kong office of Radio Free Asia, which has been operating for nearly 30 years, has shut down. Even members of the Hong Kong Legislative Council have succumbed to pressure and deleted pages commenting on current affairs on social media.
The utilization of this draconian law to suppress free speech and crackdown on civil society activities is already evident, with the government cracking down on any acts or expressions related to June 4 as the anniversary approaches.
The recent arrests only serve to validate the international community’s serious doubts about the National Security Law. The law suffers from severe deficiencies and loopholes both in terms of legal procedures and substantive elements. Procedurally, the law undermines the right to due process for the arrested, such as restricting the right of detainees to choose a lawyer and limiting the right of detainees or those not yet detained to seek legal advice.
In terms of substantive accusations, the law contains ambiguous and broad elements for constituting offenses. For instance, the definition of “seditious intent” in the context of the case lacks clear boundaries and criteria, leaving significant room for subjective interpretation. Such vague and expansive provisions are pervasive throughout the National Security Law, creating an environment where individuals face psychological pressure even before a guilty verdict is reached.
Furthermore, Article 100 of the law explicitly states that cases related to national security must be heard by designated judges, raising concerns about the impartiality and neutrality of judicial decisions.
Civil groups urge the Hong Kong government to not only withdraw the prosecution against Zou Xingtong and the others but also review the National Security Law comprehensively to address the violations pointed out in reports by the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights, ensuring Hong Kong people have the space for freedom and a fearless home.
The extraterritorial application of the National Security Law will extend China’s censorship reach to Taiwan and worldwide, necessitating Taiwan’s continued support for the Hong Kong democracy movement.
Furthermore, the law’s oppressive scope isn’t limited to Hong Kong and China but affects individuals and groups globally. The opening words of the law expand its enforcement to any individual or organization in Hong Kong, including foreigners, emphasizing the law’s broader implications.
Apart from the suppression of foreigners within Hong Kong, individuals and organizations from Hong Kong face constraints even when outside the region, due to the law’s extraterritorial reach limiting their ability to speak freely. For instance, in the case of Zou Xingtong and the others, actions alleged to be seditious intent can incur criminal penalties even when conducted outside the region.
This case illustrates how mere online expressions commemorating June 4 can lead to charges and sentences as high as 7 to 10 years, posing a significant threat to anyone, especially Taiwanese and Hong Kong residents in Taiwan. This is another tool in the Hong Kong government’s arsenal for cross-border oppression following the introduction of Articles 37 and 38 under the June 30, 2020 Hong Kong version of the National Security Law.
Despite these challenges, Taiwan must continue to support Hong Kong’s fight for freedom and democracy. This year marks the 10th anniversary of Taiwan’s Sunflower Student Movement on March 18, the 10th anniversary of the Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong, as well as the 5th anniversary of the Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement in Hong Kong. During these key moments, Taiwan and Hong Kong’s democratic movements have historically supported and encouraged each other morally and practically.
Even during recent actions like the “Bluebird Movement” in Taiwan, threatened Hong Kong residents actively participate, supported not only by individual or organized Hong Kong supporters but also various Hong Kong community groups in Taiwan, demonstrating solidarity.
Civil groups hope that the Taiwan government and society will continue to provide robust moral support to Hong Kong. This moral support must translate into sustained practical actions as democracy is a marathon requiring persistence and continuous effort to break free from authoritarianism. As the June 4 commemoration approaches, everyone is invited to commemorate at Liberty Square, standing with Hong Kong and all human rights defenders around the world who uphold their beliefs and defend freedom.