In the latest development under Hong Kong’s tightening national security regime, a 58-year-old man has been sentenced to prison for making seditious social media posts. This case marks the third sedition conviction in just two days, intensifying the debate over the city’s restrictions on freedom of speech.
On Friday, September 15, 2023, Au Kin-wai, a Hong Kong resident, was sentenced to 14 months in prison for publishing 239 seditious posts across social media platforms, including Facebook, YouTube, and X (formerly known as Twitter). The ruling was delivered by Chief Magistrate Victor So in a Hong Kong court, highlighting the city’s escalating enforcement of its controversial national security law.
The case unfolded in Hong Kong’s courts, with Au’s social media activity primarily targeting the Chinese Communist Party and its leadership. The posts reportedly contained inflammatory statements aimed at destabilizing the city’s political landscape, which is already under the watchful eye of Beijing following the 2019 pro-democracy protests.
The prosecution alleged that Au’s posts constituted a direct challenge to national sovereignty, a crime under Hong Kong’s recently expanded sedition laws. Au was accused of urging citizens to revolt, calling for the resignations of Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee. His messages, which included labeling the Communist Party as a purveyor of falsehoods, were deemed to provoke hatred and contempt against Hong Kong’s government and law enforcement.
Chief Magistrate So, one of the selected judges tasked with handling national security cases, ruled that Au’s actions were a deliberate attempt to sow social discord and undermine national security. According to So, Au’s behavior “posed a clear threat to national sovereignty” and sought to incite public unrest.
The sedition charges against Au are part of a broader crackdown initiated by Beijing in response to the pro-democracy protests of 2019. Following those mass demonstrations, the central government imposed a national security law in Hong Kong in 2020, aimed at restoring order and curbing dissent. In March 2023, the territory passed a new, stricter law, often referred to as “Article 23,” which expands the definition of sedition and other offenses, such as treason, sabotage, and espionage.
Au’s conviction follows a revived use of colonial-era sedition laws, which had remained largely dormant until recently. Though sedition had long been a criminal offense in Hong Kong, it was rarely prosecuted. However, the enactment of the national security law and subsequent legislation has breathed new life into these regulations, making sedition a key tool in suppressing anti-government sentiment.
The defense argued that Au’s social media accounts had very few followers and that his posts were more about seeking attention than inciting a genuine rebellion. However, the court ruled that the intent behind the posts, not their reach, was sufficient to constitute sedition. Under the updated laws, the maximum sentence for sedition has increased from two years to seven, reflecting the heightened penalties for this offense.
Au’s sentencing came just one day after two other Hong Kong citizens were convicted on sedition charges, including one man who was jailed for wearing a T-shirt displaying protest slogans. These back-to-back convictions have drawn sharp criticism from human rights groups. Amnesty International’s China Director, Sarah Brooks, condemned the recent rulings, calling them a “blatant attack on the right to freedom of expression.”
Hong Kong officials, however, have defended the national security laws, arguing they are vital to safeguarding stability and fulfilling the city’s constitutional responsibilities. The laws are aimed at preventing external interference and internal disruptions that threaten the governance of the Chinese-controlled city. Nevertheless, critics in the West and pro-democracy activists argue that these measures further erode Hong Kong’s unique political and civil liberties.
The recent sedition convictions in Hong Kong underscore the increasingly restrictive political environment as Beijing tightens its grip on the city. While the government maintains that these laws are essential for national security, critics view them as another step in suppressing freedoms once protected under the “one country, two systems” framework. With sedition penalties becoming more severe, the balance between security and individual rights continues to be a flashpoint in Hong Kong’s evolving legal landscape.