Hong Kong has long been regarded as a model of press freedom, but recently its reputation has become somewhat tarnished. The most recent example of this was the unprecedented raid of news media offices by the territory's Independent Commission Against Corruption, which has caused anxiety among those in the industry.
The operation was in response to the press naming a witness held under protective custody in an anti-graft case concerning Semtech International Holdings. The court expressed its dissatisfaction that the name had been leaked and called the for the Department of Justice to investigate. They put it in the hands of commission, which, on July 24, sent out officers to search the premises of eight newspapers.
Apart from "turning over" their offices, the commission even confiscated reporters' computers and material related to the case. The home of an Apple Daily reporter was also searched. With the use of almost 100 personnel in the operation, the commission wrote a new page in the history of Hong Kong's media.
What was it the commission was trying to obtain? The purpose of this massive operation was to obtain the identity of the person who leaked the name of the woman in protective custody; they wanted to know the media's source.
The commission is no stranger to raiding the offices of media outlets. Four years ago, the commission arrested an Apple Daily reporter and searched the newspaper's office on the suspicion the reporter had bribed a police officer to obtain police files.
In this instance, eight media offices were raided simultaneously, making this an unprecedented raid in terms of scale. What is most ridiculous about this is its complete heavy-handedness -- it is using a cannon to shoot a sparrow, so to speak.
The leak was not a major matter. Nor was the person who provided the information a vicious criminal. The Semtech case was only a case of embezzlement. The whole operation was simply to catch someone who had leaked information in a relatively insignificant event, not to catch spies who might compromise national security.
In legal jargon, this is called "disproportionate force." In political terms it is an attempt to muzzle the media. That Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
The media in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan have all been oppressed in recent years. Media freedom has always been suppressed in China, and not long ago, the chief editor of the Nanfang Daily was sentenced to 12 years on trumped up charges of corruption.
Although the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) used to be a victim of a muzzled media, the victim has now turned into the oppressor and the governing party has also not refrained from raiding the offices of newspapers. This behavior creates an ugly precedent in Taiwan.
Hong Kong used to be the haven of a free press, but in recent years media personalities with a reputation for speaking boldly have one after another been silenced, and the outspoken "news hound" is a dieing breed. If the Hong Kong media does not protest this large-scale search, seek justice for its cause and demand that Tung guarantee media freedom, then it won't be long before journalists in Hong Kong meet the same fate as the chief editor of Nanfang Daily.
A free media must be fought for, and although Taiwan is not a good example of a society with a free media, there is plenty that Hong Kong can learn from us in this respect.
Wang Chien-chuang is president of The Journalist magazine.
TRANSLATED BY Ian Bartholomew
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS