A Hong Kong teacher sacked over her criticism of the police on social media during the 2019 anti-extradition movement has won her case for a reversal of the decision.
Toffee Tam, a veteran government school teacher, was disciplined by the Civil Service Bureau (CSB) in July 2023 for her 2019 posts. The bureau said that her Facebook posts had negatively affected students and tarnished the authorities’ reputation.
In October 2023, Ms. Tam filed an application for judicial review at the High Court, alleging that the dismissal decision of the CSB was procedurally inappropriate and interfered with her freedom of speech.
Facebook Posts Criticizing Hong Kong Police
Ms. Tam has been a civil service diploma teacher since 1995 and taught at Jockey Club Government Secondary School in Kowloon Tong from 2015 to 2019.Her dismissal was due to eight Cantonese posts on Facebook made between mid-June and early September 2019, including one that read “Corrupt cops, may your whole family die” and another reads “Exactly what kind of training [did] they receive, how much money are [the police] paid?” attached with a video of a police officer falling.
‘Not a KOL, Posts Not Seen by Students’
Anson Wong, Ms. Tam’s barrister, said in an earlier hearing that the Facebook posts under the complaint, which were posted on Ms. Tam’s private Facebook account, had nothing to do with education work. She had no students as “friends” on the account, nor was she a key opinion leader (KOL). A KOL is someone on a social platform who has influential power.
Mr. Wong argued that the posts in question fell far short of the threshold of hate speech or inciting violence and that the punishment of dismissal was disproportionate since his client did not make any inappropriate remarks while teaching at the school. He continued that the post that seemed to wish death upon an officer’s family was a common expression of anger in Cantonese and should not be taken literally.
He criticized the CSB’s decision as untenable and overly intrusive on freedom of expression.
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” he said, quoting the famous maxim. He added that free speech is significant as it allows people to express their emotions and prevents them from being let out through violence.
In a written judgment handed down on April 26, Judge Russell Coleman said it is unclear why the CSB considered a dismissal the only appropriate option.
“I am satisfied that the punishment of dismissal without benefits is so harsh and oppressive in the overall circumstances that its imposition must have involved some error of law,” he wrote.
Judge Coleman pointed out that concerning the objectives of preserving the political neutrality of the civil service and maintaining public trust in teachers, compulsory retirement with retention of benefits appeared to be an appropriate punishment.
He added that while it was appreciated that the authorities had adopted a “zero-tolerance” approach towards the improper professional conduct of Government school teachers and that the public had higher expectations of teachers, these did not necessarily explain why Ms. Tam needed to leave the service and be deprived of her benefits after a 25-year teaching career.
Judge Coleman further wrote that Ms. Tam had not committed any misconduct in her nearly 25-year teaching career, that she “had an unblemished record of conduct” prior to the incident, and that, considering her present age, it was believed that it would be very difficult for her to find a new job.
“The practical reality [is] that at her age it may be difficult or even impossible for [Ms. Tam] to find new employment, let alone employment which enables rebuilding of any part of a retirement fund,” he wrote.
Moreover, the authorities did not find that the postings in question had affected any of the students.
Free Speech Argument Rejected
Despite Ms. Tam winning the case, her argument that the dismissal ordered by the CSB undermined her freedom of expression was rejected.“[W]here it is undisputed that teachers and civil servants are permitted to express their views, provided that they do so peacefully and lawfully and take care to prevent their views being misused, the interference with the Applicant’s freedom of expression was limited,” Mr. Coleman wrote in his judgment.
The Hong Kong Professional Teachers’ Union (PTU), established 48 years ago, is the largest teachers’ union in Hong Kong with over 90,000 members. It participated in many rallies and assemblies during the movement in 2019.
The CCP’s mouthpiece named and criticized the PTU as “misleading the students and poisoning the next generation,” saying that it is necessary to “eradicate the poisonous tumor of the PTU.”
Fung Wai-wah, president of the PTU, said the political and social situation in Hong Kong had become “drastic,” and the union was unable to find a solution.
“It’s a difficult decision, a helpless decision, and a heart-wrenching decision,” he told a press conference at the time.
Students were on the frontlines of the city-wide pro-democracy protests in 2019, with teachers among some of the thousands arrested.
