Abstract:
The label of Civil Disobedience holds a significant weight in how people perceive different protest actions. However, the definition of Civil Disobedience has been a point of argument for years. It is unlikely there will ever be one definition that can fit all situations, but many do try. Unfortunately, the current definitions generally fail to consider the types of actions and complexities that are unique to less liberal societies. The result is that many actions in these societies ultimately cannot be labelled as Civil Disobedience. This paper looks at how certain elements often described in Civil Disobedience definitions discourse work in less liberal societies. This will be done with the help of the example of the Anti-Extradition Bill Protests in Hong Kong during 2019 and 2020. These protests surrounded the introduction of the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill which became of great controversy in Hong Kong. The introduction of the Bill led to widespread protests throughout the region. However, there are mixed views on whether these protests can be labelled as Civil Disobedience. Ultimately, under the current definitions of Civil Disobedience, the protests would not be considered to fall under the heading. This paper will show how the key elements of Civil Disobedience do not reflect the complex situations that can arise in less liberal societies.
