Hang Tuan Chow
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2024-032-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2024
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 35.86166
Longitude: 104.195397
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- China
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- Dates of prior UN action
- 1 May 2023
- Type of record
- Named individual
- Gender
- Female
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Type of rights defended
- Unclear in SG Report
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
Submission to / Opinion of the WGAD
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Special Procedures: thematic
- Type of attempted engagement
- Submission of information to UN
- UN raised case of person/organization
- Reprisal information
On 1 May 2023, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found the detention of Ms. Hang Tuan Chow to be arbitrary (A/HRC/WGAD/2023/30).11 In its opinion, the Working Group referred to the reply of the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) and in particular to its statement that the proceedings against Ms. Chow were ongoing and therefore, any interference with the case of Ms. Hang Tuan Chow would be a matter inconsistent with the principle of sub judice. The Working Group noted that the Government’s reply also pointed out that under common law publishing statements that were intended to interfere with or obstruct the due administration of justice or perform acts with the same intention may constitute “criminal contempt of court”.12 According to information received by OHCHR, there are concerns that the submission by the source to the Working Group on the alleged arbitrary detention of Ms. Hang Tuan Chow, may accordingly be deemed to constitute “criminal contempt of court” and trigger corresponding liability
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Government response dates
- 11 July 2024
- Government response content
On 11 July the Government responded to the note verbale sent in connection to the present report noting that the State respected and protected human rights and that it protected individuals and social organizations in their normal exchanges and cooperation with the United Nations, in accordance with the law. The Government noted that it firmly opposed intervention in the normal handling of cases by the judicial organs “on the pretext of false allegations of so-called reprisals” against those who cooperate with the United Nations human rights mechanisms, and that such intervention gives visibility to criminals, runs counter to the spirit of the rule of law and infringes on Chinese judicial sovereignty.
The Government stated that all cases would continue to be handled in a fair, just and impartial manner in accordance with the law in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
- Was the case raised by a State at the UN?
- No
- Which State raised the case at the UN and when?
BENELUX States raised the case in September 2025 at the 60th session of the HRC during the Interactive Dialogue with the Assistant Secretary-General on reprisals: "1. Chow Hang-Tung from Hong Kong is arbitrarily detained for exercising her right to freedom of expression. We call for her immediate release."
Germany raised the case in September 2025 at the 60th session of the HRC during the Interactive Dialogue with the Assistant Secretary-General on reprisals: "We condemn reprisals in the strongest terms and express our utmost concern about the many individual cases documented in the report. This includes, but is not limited to the cases of: - Yu Wensheng, Xu Yan and Chow Hang-Tung [Sprich: Yü Uen-scheng, Schü Yän, Tschou Hang-Tung],."
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 1
- In which SG report was this case followed up on? 0
- 2025
- Follow up information provided in SG report 0
- The 1 May 2023 decision of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention that found the detention of Ms. Chow Hang Tung to be arbitrary (A/HRC/WGAD/2023/30),40 and related concerns that the submission by the source to the Working Group may be deemed to constitute “criminal contempt of court” and trigger corresponding liability, as suggested in the reply of the Government of HKSAR, was included in the 2024 report of the SecretaryGeneral.41 According to information received by OHCHR, following the Working Group’s decision, Ms. Chow Hang Tung was put into solitary confinement nine times between June and December 2023, and repeatedly again throughout 2024. Reportedly, she was placed in a 7 square meter cell for 23 hours a day, for periods that usually ranged from 7 to 14 days (although the longest stretch was of 18 days), and she was taken for one hour a day to an indoor area of the facility with other detainees, but with no access to fresh air or sunlight.
- During the reporting period, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention noted with grave concern that it had received allegations of reprisals and/or intimidation against Ms. Chow Hang Tung. The Working Group referred to the Government’s response and expressed grave concerns that the source’s submission regarding Ms. Chow’s detention could potentially give rise to liability for the crime of criminal contempt. The Working Group emphasized that any such acts were absolutely unacceptable and called for such actions to cease immediately (A/HRC/57/44 para 30).55. Regarding Ms. Hang Tuan Chow, the Government stated that her detention conditions complied with Hong Kong law and international standards and that, under the Prison Rules, authorities may restrict an inmate’s contact with others to protect the individual or maintain order.
- Followup Trends 0
- Stayed same
- Date of follow up 0
- 22 July 2024
- Did the government respond? 0
- Yes
- Was this case followed up by a UN body? 0
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic