When Books Threaten Power: From Việt Nam to Hong Kong

Minister of Culture, Sports, and Tourism Lâm Thị Phương Thanh recently announced that a draft amendment to the Publishing Law would establish “three layers of control” over books regarding history, national leaders, and sovereignty. This proposal has sparked concerns about adding further restrictions to the already stringent publishing environment in Việt Nam under the guise of “ensuring political security.”

Prosecutions related to publishing are not rare in Việt Nam. Recently, authorities arrested Nguyễn Thành Nam, the author of Story With Thanh—A New Account of the Light, for allegedly producing, storing, and disseminating anti-state materials. Furthermore, authorities charged and detained three executives and employees of the Writers’ Association Publishing House, along with a company CEO, for editing, publishing, and promoting the book.

In a parallel event not far from Việt Nam, police in Hong Kong raided two independent bookstores and arrested five individuals on suspicion of acts carried out with “seditious intent.” Authorities claimed these individuals displayed publications that incited hatred against the government, the judiciary, and law enforcement.

Both cases illustrate a distinct parallel: when authorities view books as threats to the regime, publishing restrictions inevitably transform into restrictions on freedom and democracy. 

Why does such behavior happen?

The Story in Việt Nam

In Việt Nam, the controversy surrounding Story With Thanh—A New Account of the Light serves as a clear example of the nation’s censorship system.

Following public and media backlash, the Authority of Publication, Printing, and Distribution directed the Writers’ Association Publishing House on June 2 to suspend the book’s distribution and reassess its content. Two days later, the agency escalated its response, ordering the publisher to recall the book entirely and determine the culpability of those involved. On June 7, local cultural agencies, the National Library, and the public library system were asked to help remove the book from circulation and public access. [1]

The situation quickly turned into a criminal investigation. On July 7, authorities charged and detained author Nguyễn Thành Nam and business executive Trần Việt Anh under Article 117 of the Penal Code. Investigators alleged that videos and the book they produced stored and disseminated distorted revolutionary history and the policies of the Communist Party and state while insulting President Hồ Chí Minh, Gen. Võ Nguyên Giáp, and other leaders. [2]

On July 15, authorities charged and detained three additional individuals: Writers’ Association Publishing House Director Nguyễn Thuý Hằng, Editor-in-Chief Đào Bá Đoàn, and Editorial Department Head Nguyễn Văn Yên. They were accused of helping edit, revise, publish, and promote a book containing anti-state material. [3]

There is a difference between historical inaccuracies and conduct labeled “anti-state.” While weak scholarship can be handled through criticism, corrections, or recalls, opposing the state is a serious criminal charge requiring multifaceted proof. Authorities must prove both the presence of problematic material and an underlying anti-state intent in its production.

As a result, an editor’s role may now stretch beyond verifying source reliability. Editors might be forced to anticipate whether security officials will interpret a text as an attack on the official historical narrative or a threat to the regime’s reputation.

The Story in Hong Kong

On July 15, 2026, Hong Kong police raided the Have A Nice Stay and Greenfield bookstores to seize books and electronic equipment. Founded by former journalists, Have a Nice Stay was among the few surviving spaces that still sold literature on politics, history, and society, including works by dissenting writers.

Authorities claimed that the seized publications contained material that incited hatred against China’s central government, the Hong Kong government, the judiciary, and law enforcement. Hong Kong police arrested five booksellers on suspicion of committing acts with seditious intent. [4]

This crackdown was not an isolated incident. In March 2026, four individuals at Book Punch were arrested after displaying The Troublemaker, a biography of media tycoon Jimmy Lai, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for colluding with foreign forces and sedition. Other arrests followed in June of the same year. [5]

Following these arrests, Hong Kong Security Secretary Chris Tang stated that booksellers bear the responsibility for ensuring the titles they sell do not endanger national security. However, he rejected calls to publish a list of prohibited books, arguing that doing so could impede law enforcement. [6]

By refusing to provide transparent rules, officials can impose criminal liability on booksellers without ever defining where the “red line” actually lies. In modern Hong Kong, authorities no longer view competing interpretations of history or politics as a natural component of public debate. Instead, they are categorized as threats to national security. 

Rather than valuing books as pillars of knowledge, the government now approaches them with pervasive fear and treats them as direct dangers to the state.

“Protecting the Regime” Over “Protecting the State”

The recent arrests in Hong Kong and Việt Nam share a common thread: authorities treat the entire process of writing, editing, publishing, and selling books as a chain of activities capable of endangering the regime.

In both cases, publications faced accusations of expressing hatred toward the government, distorting history, or opposing the state. These accusations often conflate the government, the state, the nation, and the regime, placing them all within a single protected sphere. 

Politically, however, these concepts are not identical. The state is a system of institutions, while the government is made up of the individuals currently administering those institutions. Furthermore, the nation encompasses a community that is far broader than the governing apparatus at any given moment.

By making these distinctions, it becomes evident that criticizing a government is not equivalent to opposing the nation. Similarly, debating an interpretation of history does not automatically constitute a plot to overthrow the regime.

While citizens’ challenges to authorities can help uncover mistakes in a democracy, treating unfavorable narratives primarily as threats shifts the system’s priority. The focus moves from verifying information to protecting the power of ruling authorities to dictate acceptable interpretations. This dynamic is a hallmark of dictatorship, where the government presents its version of history and decides if any other versions are permitted to exist.

Democracy requires that power remain open to challenge. However, power can hardly be challenged when the government determines what information is legitimate and wields national security laws against those who offer alternative perspectives.

---

Even if some claims in the recalled books are inaccurate, the state possesses ample resources to rebut them without escalating every political or historical dispute into a security crisis meant to intimidate the public.

Over time, this hostile environment forces individuals to conclude that it is simply safer to avoid writing, publishing, or selling anything that might displease the authorities. 

As a result, censorship is no longer a tool wielded exclusively by state agencies. It morphs into pervasive self-censorship among authors, editors, and booksellers.

When a government equates historical debate or criticism of authorities with treason against the state, genuine knowledge is not the only casualty. Freedom and democracy perish alongside it.

---

Nguyễn Thanh Liêm wrote this article in Vietnamese and published it in Luật Khoa Magazine on August 21, 2026. The Vietnamese Magazine translated it into English.