Columbia Global Freedom of Expression seeks to contribute to the development of an integrated and progressive jurisprudence and understanding on freedom of expression and information around the world.  It maintains an extensive database of international case law. This is its newsletter dealing with recent developments  in the field.

The battle for freedom of expression continues in Hong Kong. This week, in one of the city’s largest courtrooms, as part of the region’s largest national security case, the appeal hearings began for 13 individuals of “Hong Kong 47.” In this collective case, out of the 47 pro-democracy activists, 45 were convicted and sentenced to prison; their terms range from 4 years and 2 months to a decade in jail.

“This appeal hearing is a chance for the courts to start righting the wrongs of this unprecedented mass prosecution,” Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s China Director, said in a statement. “Only by overturning these convictions can Hong Kong’s courts begin to restore the city’s global standing as a place where rights are respected and where people are allowed to peacefully express their views without fear of arrest.”

One decision we are featuring, HKSAR v. NG Gordon Ching-Hang, is part of the “Hong Kong 47” proceedings, which are emblematic of the crackdown on human rights in the region. Arrested in 2021, based on their connection to the “unofficial” primary election for the Legislative Council in July 2020, the pro-democracy activists were charged with “conspiracy to commit subversion” under the National Security Law (NSL).

As we’ve noted earlier, June 30 marked five years since Beijing imposed the NSL on Hong Kong. In his new article, Sarthak Gupta, Legal Researcher and Editor at CGFoE, outlines how, within the past five years, the NSL helped transform – rapidly and extensively – the territory’s legal system and framework on freedom of expression.

“[T]he NSL fundamentally criminalized previously protected political discourse, symbolic expression, and press freedom,” writes Gupta. His detailed analysis covers HKSAR v. Tong Ying-kit (a case on political slogans), judicial restrictions on the “Glory to Hong Kong” song, HKSAR v. Chu Kai Pong (a case on symbolic clothing), and the ongoing proceedings against Jimmy Lai, founder of Apple Daily.

From Cuba to Togo, pro-democracy actions carry on across the globe. We offer a glimpse at some of them below, with news from Kenya, Georgia, and Thailand. As Hong Kong shows – and Gupta underscores – legislative interventions and compliant courts can effectively neutralize “established constitutional arrangements, international legal obligations, and judicial independence.”

Hong Kong is a cautionary tale. Yet it is not the only one.

Image Credit: LeMan Magazine

mage Credit: LeMan Magazine Türkiye: CGFoE Joins Statement in Support of LeMan Magazine

CGFoE joins Cartoonists Rights, Cartooning for Peace, and others in condemning the arrests of LeMan magazine staff members in Istanbul.

The satirical magazine is being accused of representing the Prophet Muhammad in a cartoon – a depiction that is impermissible in Islam. By now, five staff members, including cartoonist Doğan Pehlivan, have been detained (in the latest arrest, editor-in-chief Aslan Özdemir was removed from an airplane). Tuncay Akgün, co-founder and former editor-in-chief, is being targeted with an arrest warrant.

CGFoE is appalled by the detention of LeMan magazine staff and calls on Turkish authorities to immediately release all detained journalists and uphold their international obligations to protect freedom of expression. Satire is not a crime – it is a powerful form of social commentary and a vital part of democratic discourse. Silencing cartoonists and satirists is a direct assault on press freedom.

In related news: On June 26, when the cartoon in question came out, LeMan cartoonist Zehra Ömeroğlu was acquitted of obscenity after nearly five years of being on trial.

Hong Kong
HKSAR v. NG Gordon Ching-hang (The Trial of the Hong Kong 47)
Decision Date: May 30, 2024; November 19, 2024
The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Court of First Instance found NG Gordon Ching-Hang and other defendants guilty of conspiring to subvert State power under Article 22 (subversion) of the National Security Law of Hong Kong. The case arose from the defendants’ participation in the 2020 Legislative Council Primary Election, during which they allegedly planned to indiscriminately veto government budgets if elected, with the aim of compelling the Chief Executive to accept the “Five Demands” or resign. The Court of First Instance ruled that such conduct, when done with the specific intent to seriously interfere with or undermine the lawful performance of governmental functions, amounted to “subverting the State power” under Article 22(3) of the National Security Law. It rejected the defence of parliamentary privilege, holding that the alleged scheme originated outside the legislature and constituted an abuse of constitutional authority. The Court concluded that the offence was clearly defined and that the acts of NG Gordon Ching-Hang and the 46 others, if proven, would fall squarely within its ambit. In conclusion, the Court found most of the defendants guilty of the charge of Conspiracy to Commit Subversion. The Court acquitted Lau Wai-chung and Lee Yue-shun.

HKSAR v. Lai Chee Ying (Unauthorized Assembly Case)
Decision Date: March 5, 2024
The Court of Final Appeal of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region granted leave to activist and media proprietor, Jimmy Lai, and other protestors on the limited question of whether courts must conduct an operational proportionality assessment before convicting individuals for knowingly taking part in an unauthorized assembly under Section 17A(3)(a) of the Public Order Ordinance. The case arose from a 2019 protest where Lai and other applicants led a large procession from Victoria Park to Chater Road despite a police ban. While the Court overturned their convictions for organizing the assembly, it upheld their convictions for participating in it. The Court of Final Appeal dismissed all other grounds of appeal, including constitutional challenges and claims of grave injustice, but agreed that the proportionality issue raised matters of general importance warranting full appellate consideration.

United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention 
[Previously featured]
The Case of Mr. Jimmy Lai Chee-ying (Hong Kong, China)
Decision Date: September 26, 2024
The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) held that the solitary detention of Jimmy Lai by Hong Kong authorities was arbitrary and in violation of international human rights, particularly the right to freedom of expression under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Jimmy Lai, a prominent pro-democracy advocate and founder of Apple Daily, was detained for over three years and prosecuted under Hong Kong’s National Security Law (NSL) – and other charges arising from his peaceful participation in protests, political commentary, and media work. The Working Group observed that his detention lacked a valid legal basis, punished him for exercising his rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, denied him a fair trial due to political interference, and amounted to discrimination based on political opinion. The UNWGAD criticized the vague and overbroad provisions of the NSL, the reversal of the presumption of bail, and the use of criminal law to suppress legitimate dissent. Concluding that Jimmy Lai’s deprivation of liberty was an arbitrary detention, the Working Group called for his immediate and unconditional release, reparations, and urgent legal reforms to align Hong Kong’s laws with international human rights obligations.

● Kenya: Suppression of Dissent Must Stop – Protect Fundamental Rights Now. In response to the brutal suppression of protests, ARTICLE 19 calls on the Kenyan authorities to immediately guarantee the constitutionally protected rights to peaceful assembly and expression. Last month, marking a year since the anti-Finance Bill protests had turned deadly, thousands of young Kenyans rallied peacefully; the police conducted arbitrary arrests, used tear gas, rubber bullets, and even live ammunition, killing at least eight people. This month, Kenyans protested on Saba Saba day, a commemoration of the country’s 1990 pro-democracy movement; the authorities followed with another violent crackdown, leading to the highest single-day death toll since the recent wave of protests began – over thirty people died. ARTICLE 19 stresses that the Kenyan government pursues a broader strategy of silencing dissent, and young people are its particular target.

● Georgia: Jailing of Teenage Protester Raises Fair Trial Concerns. Amnesty International flags fair trial concerns in the case of a 19-year-old protester in Georgia, who was sentenced to over four years in prison. Arrested last December, Saba Jikia was accused of kicking a fallen un-uniformed police officer, who testified he had not sustained injuries. Denis Krivosheev, Deputy Director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia at Amnesty, states the Court failed to apply youth justice procedures, available for those aged 18 to 21 under the Georgian law. “There is a wider pattern of protesters being dealt lengthy jail sentences following unfair trials,” Krivosheev said. “At the same time, Georgian authorities have proved unwilling to investigate grave violations by police, with no law enforcement officials held to account for widespread ill-treatment of protesters during arrest and allegations of torture in custody.”

● Thailand: UN Experts Say Charges against Pro-Democracy Rights Defenders Must Be Dropped. UN experts, including Irene Khan, Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, urge the Government of Thailand to stop the prosecution of woman human rights defender Pimsiri Petchnamrob, as well as others who took part in pro-democracy protests. Since her indictment in 2021, Petchnamrob has been facing ten charges, including “lèse-majesté,” “sedition,” and “participation in an illegal assembly” under the Criminal Code – all for a speech she delivered at a peaceful rally five years ago. The UN experts decried the lèse-majesté laws: “Their widespread and punitive use to silence dissent, suppress public debate, and intimidate human rights defenders, political opponents, civil society activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens violates Thailand’s international human rights obligations.” The experts called on Thailand to stop criminalizing criticism of the state.

● Kyrgyzstan: Court Orders Liquidation of Independent News Broadcaster, by Nandana Arun. The JURIST reports on the order issued by a Bishkek court liquidating Aprel TV, an independent broadcaster in Kyrgyzstan. In the case filed by state prosecutors claiming Aprel TV’s “negative and destructive” reporting undermined the government’s authority, the Court found that the channel’s content was “not news.” Referring to satirical political commentary and caricatures, the Court ruled that Aprel TV could provoke widespread unrest and harm the psychological well-being of individuals and the society at large. This decision is one in a series of recent actions shrinking freedom of speech and the press in Kyrgyzstan. Earlier this month, President Sadyr Japarov signed the new amendments to the Kyrgyz Code of Offenses into law, imposing fines for “false or unreliable” content in the media or internet.

This section of the newsletter features teaching materials focused on global freedom of expression which are newly uploaded on Freedom of Expression Without Frontiers

The Philippines: “Black Robes, Red Targets” – Caravana Filipina Report. The Caravana Filipina, a fact-finding mission on extrajudicial killings and other gross human rights violations against legal professionals in the Philippines in 2016-2023, released its final report. A joint endeavor of ten organizations, including the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute, the mission documented the cases of lawyers, judges, and prosecutors at the time of President Rodrigo Duterte’s war on drugs and in connection with their efforts to hold the government accountable. In this report, the mission lays out patterns of retaliation against legal professionals, namely through surveillance and intimidation, red-tagging, lawfare, and extrajudicial killings. The mission reveals that state actors were involved, either directly or passively, in gross human rights violations in the Philippines.

● Open Vacancy: Head of Editorial, Digital & Content at OSB. The Oversight Board is seeking a senior editorial and communications specialist to become the Head of Editorial, Digital, and Content. Location: London (or hybrid). Apply here by July 21.

● Fellowship Opportunity: Bertha Challenge 2026. Open to lawyers, investigative journalists, activists, and filmmakers, the fellowship supports full-time one-year projects that speak to the Challenge questions: “How is the collusion between governments and corporations driving the assault on the rule of law, civil rights and a free press? How do we push back to protect democratic accountability?” Applications close on July 28.

In case you missed it…

● Book Launch: The Cambridge Handbook of the Right to Freedom of Thought. This past May, the Bonavero Institute of Human Rights hosted the book launch for The Cambridge Handbook of the Right to Freedom of Thought, edited by Patrick O’Callaghan and Bethany Shiner. The first such attempt to define the global protection, interpretation, and application of the right, the handbook spans eighteen jurisdictions. The event’s recording is available on YouTube.

This newsletter is reproduced with the permission of Global Freedom of Expression.  For an archive of previous newsletters, see here.