A 48-year-old Hong Kong housewife's sentenced to four years imprisonment for "seditious" posts on Twitter and Facebook

 

Photo from four years ago today

 

Four years ago this year, a very large and peaceful protest march against a planned extradition bill took place.  Four years on, there are (many) days when it can feel like we will never see its like again.  Hong Kong has changed that much since April 28th, 2019.  

 

Consider what happened in a courtroom in Hong Kong yesterday: the sentencing of a 48-year-old housewife to 4 months imprisonment for having commited "acts with seditious intention".  Law Oi-was was said to "have published 65 statements on Twitter and Facebook between June 6, 2022 and March 28 this year that aimed to “bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection” against the Hong Kong and Central governments,” incite violence and “counsel disobedience to law,” among other intentions." 

 

As detailed on Chinese news website The Witness (and I'm sharing English language versions of as translated by DeepL): 

The defendant's posts were directed at the Central Government and the Communist Party, including a picture of a lion wearing the flag of the People's Republic of China eating a human being, "the HK$11.7 billion of the Hong Kong Police Mutual Aid Society has been erased by the motherland", "the independence of all provinces, the elimination of the Communist Party by all people, and the establishment of an independent country", "there is a new China without the Communist Party", "CCP Virus", "mutated Chinese Communist Party", and "fighting Communists"."

 

The posting is also directed at the Hong Kong SAR Government and the Police Force, including the words "I was part of the struggle back then and I was not afraid of the violent suppression by those in power", pictures showing the anti-government demonstration in Admiralty in 2014, denouncing the Hong Kong Police Force for "indiscriminate arrests", "police and triads cooperating and attacking the public", and "there is no mob but tyrannical police, no thugs but tyranny".

 

The defendant also used photos, videos, and statements showing "Restoring Hong Kong, the revolution of the times" to promote Hong Kong independence. The postings also involved incitement to violence, including "May the corpses of 30,000 black police officers be padded to pay tribute to the souls of the dead", "The death of martyr Leung Kin-fai, a year and two months of silence...", "What Hong Kong needs is a revolution", etc.

To be sure, many of the proclamations by Law Oi-wan -- who, besides being a housewife, is a single mother of four (the youngest of whom is 12 years of age) -- can seem on the wild, reckless and irresponsible side.  But can what amounts to the angry rantings of a woman whose two Twitter accounts had a total of 357 Followers really be enough of a serious threat to national security to be sentenced to four months jail?  

 

Put another way: these are by no means Key Opinion Leader (KOL) numbers by any stretch of the imagination!  Also, granted that she was reported to have a Facebook account too, whose number of "Friends" I've not seen detailed anywhere thus far.  But how many could that account possibly have; this since it belongs to the same woman who had one Twitter account with just 331 Followers and another with an even more measly 26?!

 

For the record: presiding magistrate Peter Law did judge that "the scale of the offence was small and the defendant had limited influence".  But that may make it even more shocking then that "the court decided to impose a lower starting point for sentencing" but still came up with a sentence of four months!  I suppose one should thank goodness for small mercies that Peter Law did not decide to sentence the housewife to one day in jail for every Twitter Follower that she had -- which would then amount to closer to a year.  But even so! 

 

Sharing another translated section of The Witness report: "The case also alleges that the defendant was involved in violations of the National Security Law, the National Anthem and the National Flag Law, including the use of "May Glory Be to Hong Kong" as Hong Kong's national anthem and the use of the "Black Bauhinia Flag" as Hong Kong's national flag."  From this, it would seem that Law Oi-wan's major crime was to be a public advocate of Hong Kong political independence.

 

If so, are the following red herrings? "A yellow umbrella and other items were found during a search of the defendant's home".  In that, as far as I know, yellow umbrellas, which are associated with the Umbrella Movement, symbolize a yearning for democracy for Hong Kong (but not political independence) and are not illegal (as yet).  And I've seen yellow umbrellas being carried around and hoisted up on rainy days, and sold in more than one store, as recently as this year, month and even week!

 

Something else to note: Law Oi-wa was convicted of sedition, and "sedition is not covered by the Beijing-imposed national security law, which targets secession, subversion, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts and mandates up to life imprisonment."  So, technically, she was not guilty of endangering national security.  Still, I think it's fair to argue that it's only been in national security law-era Hong Kong that she would be prosecuted for, and deemed guilty, of breaking the law!