The Court of Appeal today granted the Secretary for Justice's appeal in relation to an interim injunction for the song Glory to Hong Kong, prohibiting four classes of criminal acts relating to the song.

In a statement, the Hong Kong SAR Government said the purpose of applying for the injunction is to safeguard national security and preserve the dignity of the national anthem, adding that any person who violates the interim injunction order may be held liable for contempt of court.

Widely circulated since 2019, the song has been used to incite others to participate in acts and activities which are very likely to constitute offences such as secession and sedition, thereby endangering national security.

The song has also been mistakenly presented as the “national anthem of Hong Kong”, not only insulting the national anthem but also causing serious harm to the State and the Hong Kong SAR.

The Hong Kong SAR Government said it has acted in accordance with the law and applied to the court for an injunction for discharging its constitutional duty to safeguard national security by effectively preventing, suppressing and imposing punishment on acts or activities endangering national security.

The Basic Law, the National Security Law, the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance and other relevant laws fully guarantee that Hong Kong residents enjoy basic rights and freedom, including freedoms of speech and of the press in accordance with the law, but such freedoms are not absolute.

Relevant international covenants recognise that the law may impose reasonable and necessary restrictions on the exercise of such rights in order to safeguard national security, which is a common practice in many countries.

The injunction application pursues the legitimate aim of safeguarding national security and is necessary, reasonable, legitimate, proportionate and consistent with the requirements of the Bill of Rights. The interim injunction will not in any way affect law-abiding Hong Kong citizens in exercising their rights and freedoms in accordance with the law, the statement said.

It has never been the intent of the application to cover or affect lawful and legitimate activities conducted in or outside Hong Kong for purposes such as academic activity and news activity. For the avoidance of doubt, the interim injunction clearly states that lawful academic activity and news activity will not be prohibited on condition that such activities do not involve any of the acts in specified circumstances, it added.

The full text of the interim injunction was uploaded to the websites of the Hong Kong SAR Government, the Department of Justice and Police.

Welcoming the court ruling, Secretary for Justice Paul Lam emphasised that the injunction is not aimed at restricting the normal operation of internet service providers.

“As stated in the judgment, one of the purposes of the injunction is to persuade internet service providers not to facilitate the commission of unlawful acts by these specific persons, who are actually the defendants in this proceedings. So the effect is to persuade internet service providers not to provide convenience and not to facilitate the permission of unlawful acts.”

Mr Lam also pointed out the Government strives to preserve the free flow of information, adding that there is no cause for an internet service provider to have concerns about operating in the city. 

“The scope of the injunction is extremely narrow, we are concerned with very specific unlawful behaviour and I think there are company policies issued by internet service providers, making clear that they are willing to abide by the local law, in particular court order. So I would expect that they will honour the promise, they will act in accordance with the policy.

“On that basis, I do not see any reason why there should be any concern that this injunction will discourage or cause an internet service provider to have any concern about operating in Hong Kong and what they are doing as usual.”