“We will continue to represent our chamber members’ view that the two systems’ aspect of the HKSAR must be vigilantly strived for,” it said, referring to the “one country, two systems” principle under which the city is governed.
In blocking the injunction bid, the High Court said the publication and distribution of “Glory to Hong Kong” was already punishable under existing laws, adding a ban might not compel internet search giant Google and other technology firms to take down the tune.
Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee, convenor of the government’s key decision-making Executive Council, posted the chamber’s statement on her Twitter account.
Ip told the Post it was up to the government to decide on its next step, but she thought the reasons given by Justice Anthony Chan Kin-keung in his 30-page judgment were reasonable.
“There is disappointment in some quarters that the judge did not ‘ban’ the ‘Glory to Hong Kong’ song, but the injunction application did not ask for a blanket ban – only to prohibit four acts which are criminal offences punishable under existing criminal laws,” Ip said.
She said she believed Chan had a point that the injunction was not of real utility and “could conflict with the criminal law regime in terms of enforcement”.
Exco member Ronny Tong Ka-wah, a senior counsel, said the ruling indicated the city had judicial independence, but noted it focused on legal procedures rather than the lawfulness of the song, which could still be seen as a tool to contravene the national security law.
“Judicial independence is working in Hong Kong … but this ruling did not mean that the court disagreed that there’s something wrong with the song,” he said.
Tong said he had not heard any concerns from the city’s commerce sector including foreign businesses, and he did not think the government’s bid to ban promotion of the song would affect them.