Lawyer criticizes authorities for detaining protester, calls legal system ‘predictable and unreliable’

a screenshot of the incident from now deleted video

May 1, Labor Day, saw the Macau police arrest a man for allegedly violating the city’s Assembly and Demonstration Law by displaying and shouting slogans outside the Labour Affairs Bureau (DSAL).

On the same day, the local association Macau People Power announced the cancellation of its previously submitted notice for a march, citing “invisible pressure” from the police.

This year marks the sixth consecutive year without a Labor Day march in Macau. In both this year and last year, although notices were submitted regarding plans for a march, the police stated that the organizers had voluntarily canceled the event.

A video circulated on social media platforms on Thursday showed a man outside the DSAL headquarters in Areia Preta early that morning, displaying a banner that read, “We want the government to reduce non-local workers,” while waving both the Chinese national flag and the Macau Special Administrative Region flag. Several police officers were present, filming the scene.

Related posts quickly attracted significant attention and discussion among netizens.

At around 7 p.m., the Public Security Police (PSP) sent a text message to the media confirming the incident, stating that the man had staged a demonstration without the prior notice required by law.

The message further noted that the man was suspected of violating the relevant provisions of the city’s Assembly and Demonstration Law and was taken to a police station for further investigation after ignoring several warnings issued by the police officers on-site.

“On suspicion of protest without prior notice and disobedience to the police,” the man’s case was transferred to the Public Prosecutions Office (MP).

Under the headline “Another Person Detained in Macau for Exercising His Fundamental Right to Protest,” lawyer Jorge Menezes criticized the police on his Facebook account for excessively piling on charges against the man.

“The exercise of a right became, not one, but two criminal offenses. They feel more competent by piling crimes on top of crimes,” he remarked.

“We know what happens when someone does something that the domesticated sheep think is politically sensitive: he will be charged and found guilty. It is like watching a movie whose ending we already know. That’s how predictable and unreliable the legal system is in Macau,” he added.

“This is Macau at its best: the authoritarian and ignorant mentality of its authorities, from the police all the way to the top.”

Referring to the Macau Basic Law, which clearly stipulates that all residents of Macau have the right to assemble peacefully and without carrying weapons in public places, places open to the public, or private places, without any prior authorization, Menezes stated: “The right to protest, as the law provides, does NOT depend on prior authorization. No one needs authorization to protest. It is a fundamental right.”

Speaking about disobedience to police orders, Menezes emphasized that disobeying such orders only constitutes a crime if the orders themselves are lawful. He argued that requiring advance notice and ordering a protest to disperse do not qualify as lawful orders.

“Actually, the law provides that ‘The authorities that, outside of legal constraints, prevent or attempt to prevent the free exercise of the right of assembly or protest incur [a criminal] penalty’,” he went on to state.

Menezes also highlighted that prior notification does not equate to prior authorization from the police. Instead, the purpose of notification is to allow authorities to protect protesters and prevent those who oppose them from interfering.

On Labor Day, five representatives from Macau People Power handed a petition to the Government Headquarters in the morning. However, the group’s chairman, Lam Weng Loi, told the media that their original intention was to express their demands through a protest march.

However, as reported by All About Macau, after submitting prior notice to the police in mid-April, the group, including Lam and his fellow member, was approached multiple times over the following week by officers who invited them to meet outside the police station. During these meetings, they discussed potential “uncontrollable situations” that could arise from the march, which might hold the organizers liable for “joint responsibility” or even risk violating the National Security Law.

Ultimately, according to Lam, they felt compelled to change their plans and submit the petition instead.

The petition letter submitted to Chief Executive Sam Hou Fai reportedly expresses concerns that the employment and non-local worker policies outlined in the policy address do not meet public expectations. The group questions the authorities’ approval of non-local labor quotas, alleging that the process fails to adhere to established criteria and lacks transparency.