HKMO is alarmed by reports of the arrest of Tong Ho-wing, founder of Boom News, a Hong Kong independent news outlet. He appears to be charged with acting with seditious intention, we say ‘appeared’ because the authorities refuse to release details of this arrest. The reality is that he was reporting on a small demonstration, commemorating the police assault on democracy activists in 2019 during the mass protest of that year.
The arrest marks a serious escalation of attacks on the media, as national security legislation is now being used to conflate advocacy with reporting. Another seven people, presumably participants in the commemoration, were also arrested.
They were marking the anniversary of the 31 August 2019 attack at the Prince Edward subway station where citizens were locked into the station as police rampaged through the train carriages assaulting people they believed to be protestors.
Mr. Tang has worked as an independent journalist since 2020, conducting street reporting and live broadcasts. To date, the police have not publicly named Tang, nor have they specified the particular acts he is alleged to have committed. Police said that individuals had stood outside Prince Edward Station holding flowers and shouting “seditious slogans” and were suspected of spreading false information, attacking the Hong Kong SAR Government and smearing the police. Police have also stated that further arrests may follow.
Observing, filming, interviewing and live-streaming events taking place in public spaces are fundamental activities of frontline journalism. Whether a news report conforms with the account given by the government or police cannot be the standard by which legality is determined.
If journalists covering events in public places can face national security investigations because of their reporting, a chilling effect will extend far beyond one journalist or one independent media outlet. Other frontline journalists covering protests, public gatherings, police operations and other contentious public events will inevitably have to consider whether they could face similar risks.
HKMO is also concerned about whether materials seized by police during the searches include journalistic material. Such material may contain information relating to confidential sources, unpublished reporting and other sensitive information. Any search and seizure must strictly comply with the legal protections afforded to journalistic material under Hong Kong law.
Joseph Ngan, Chair of HKMO, said: “There is one very simple question that needs to be answered: What specific act led to Tang Ho-wing’s arrest?
“If the case relates to his work as a journalist filming, live-streaming or reporting from the scene the police have an even greater responsibility to explain clearly to the public where the line lies between legitimate journalistic activity and the alleged seditious conduct.
“A journalist’s job is to be at the scene and record what they see and hear. Journalism can be questioned and criticised but it should not automatically be treated as a crime simply because a report differs from the official account. If that boundary becomes blurred, every journalist still working in Hong Kong will be affected.”
HKMO urges the police to disclose promptly the specific legal and factual basis for Tang Ho-wing’s arrest, clarify whether the case concerns news gathering and reporting activities, and to ensure that he has timely access to legal representation.
We also call on the Hong Kong Government to respect the freedoms of the press and expression guaranteed under the Basic Law, and to ensure that journalists are able to carry out lawful news reporting without fear or undue interference.
News reporting is not a crime. Recording events on the ground is not a crime. Press freedom requires clear legal boundaries.