It was widely used by protesters to communicate with each other and organize events.
In the past, city courts have convicted people who used their Telegram channels to incite protests for charges including inciting crimes and aiding and abetting attacks on police officers.
But cybersecurity experts told the Washington Post that legal action by city authorities is unlikely to succeed, as concerns remain high over vague content regulation rules on social media and instant messaging services.
“The 2019 demonstrations are long behind us, and the app was reportedly used extensively by anti-government elements in Hong Kong at the time,” said Steve Vickers, CEO of international political and corporate risk consultancy Steve Vickers and Associates.
“To make open waves at this point would be counterproductive,”
Vickers added that it would be sufficient for city authorities to monitor legal developments in the French case, as law enforcement could use the “vulnerabilities” uncovered by the investigation in their investigations.
The app’s users include protesters and rally organizers on every continent, and it is known for its advanced security features and the ability to have up to 200,000 members in a group.
Fan clubs in Hong Kong are also known to use Telegram as a forum for their members to discuss celebrity news and organize activities.
With nearly a billion users worldwide, it is one of the most popular instant messaging apps in the world.
Francis Fong Po-kiu, honorary president of the Hong Kong Information Technology Federation, said Durov’s arrest had raised a “red flag” in the city and elsewhere about the possibility of similar prosecutions.
“If this case is confirmed and (Durov) goes to prison, it will be a red flag for other social media platforms as well,” Fong warned.
“We don’t know how governments and law enforcement agencies decide what (a regulation) is satisfactory.”
Three cybersecurity experts, including Vickers and Fong, said that while Telegram’s status as an instant messaging platform is widely known, the platform is not off-limits to regulators.
“Telegram can display or (allow users to) see other users nearby and so it can be used in situations of civil unrest or demonstrations to organize or direct crowds,” Vickers explained.
Anthony Lai Cheuk-tung, a security researcher and director of cybersecurity firm VX Research, said Telegram has been “more defiant” in cooperating with law enforcement agencies than its competitors WhatsApp or iMessage.
“Telegram has resisted efforts by some countries to legally enforce access to user data, sometimes resulting in service blockages in those regions,” Lai said.
“However, Telegram’s terms allow them to cooperate with lawful disclosure orders.”
Russia banned Telegram in 2018 after the company refused to release encrypted messages to Russian security authorities.
The ban was lifted in 2020, but due to the difficulties in blocking Telegram’s IP address, the service remained unaffected despite the embargo.
But technology lawyer Joshua Chu Kiu-wah of the Hauzen law firm said the outcome of a court hearing in Durov’s case could affect how authorities deal with social media and online platform owners, saying many countries still do not have clear rules on the responsibility of online platforms in preventing crime.
“The Durov case could be a wake-up call for social media companies to rethink their content moderation policies and protections,” Chu said.
He added that the case could also serve as an impetus for the development of clearer guidelines for messaging services.
Chu added that prosecutors should issue disclosure orders against misconduct on online platforms rather than arresting the owners.
He said that intervening to prevent illegal activities is the responsibility of law enforcement authorities and not of online platform operators.
Telegram, based in Dubai, was founded by Durov in 2013.
He left Russia in 2014 after refusing to comply with government demands to shut down opposition activists on his social media platform VK, which he sold.
