Two former organizers of Hong Kong’s annual vigil commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown have been found guilty in a national security case under a China-imposed law that has significantly impacted the city’s once-active pro-democracy movement.
Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung, former leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, were convicted in 2021 on charges of inciting subversion under the national security law. Both had denied the charges and could face up to 10 years in prison. The alliance was also implicated in the verdict.
According to the three judges, the alliance’s appeal to “end one-party dictatorship” was interpreted not as a call for the ruling Communist Party to revert to a multiparty system under the constitution but as an attempt to remove its leadership under the constitution. They argued that the term “end” implied “overthrowing” and “undermining.”
The judges stated that the defendants persisted in advocating for this cause even after the law was enacted, despite it conflicting with the constitution, which stipulates the party’s leadership as a fundamental aspect of socialism with Chinese characteristics. This was deemed as falling under the category of “other unlawful means” within the security law.
This recent verdict is part of a series of legal actions against Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement, which has faced significant challenges from authorities in Hong Kong and China.
The annual candlelight vigil organized by the alliance, which attracted tens of thousands of attendees each year to commemorate the victims of the Tiananmen Square incident, was prohibited in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, right before the enforcement of the security law by Beijing in response to the 2019 anti-government protests.
Lee and Chow, who smiled and greeted spectators as they left the courtroom, are awaiting sentencing. They plan to seek leniency during their upcoming plea hearings. Observers view their trial as emblematic of the decline in freedom of expression in Hong Kong since its transfer from British to Chinese rule in 1997.
The judges have not disclosed the detailed rationale behind the conviction, stating that the full judgment will be released online at a later time.
Eric Lai, a senior fellow at the Georgetown Center for Asian Law, highlighted that the charge of inciting subversion is commonly utilized in mainland China to criminalize the activities of human rights advocates, activists, and intellectuals. He emphasized the parallels between the judicial system in Hong Kong and that under party control in mainland China.
During the trial, prosecutors argued that the case was not politically motivated but centered on the perceived incitement by the alliance to overthrow the leadership of China’s Communist Party through unlawful means. This was based on the group’s advocacy for “ending one-party rule,” among other demands.
In defense, Lee clarified that the intention was not to eliminate the party’s leadership but to progress towards democracy, allowing the populace to choose their leaders while opposing the enforcement of “dictatorship” by the Communist Party.
Chow, representing herself as a barrister, explained that “ending one-party rule” signified putting an end to unchecked power in the state. She criticized the reversal of the standards for determining right and wrong in their case.
The trial, which was initially scheduled for 75 days but concluded after 24 days, proceeded swiftly. Albert Ho, another defendant in the case, had previously pleaded guilty, a move that might lead to a reduced sentence.
Following the verdict, Lee’s wife, Elizabeth Tang, expressed disappointment and frustration, maintaining Lee’s innocence and questioning the fairness of the judges’ decision. She mentioned the possibility of an appeal in the future.
Supporters congregated outside the court during the proceedings, with Tang Ngok-kwan, a former alliance member, sharing concerns about restrictions on materials with sensitive content. The potential conviction of the alliance would challenge his understanding of the city’s legal system.
The 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown, where hundreds, possibly thousands, lost their lives as the military intervened, remains a significant event in China’s modern history. It marked a turning point, indicating that economic reforms would not be accompanied by political liberalization.
Subsequent to the easing of COVID-19 restrictions, the former vigil location in Hong Kong was repurposed for a carnival organized by pro-Beijing factions. Beijing defended the imposition of the 2020 security law as essential for the city’s stability, resulting in the incarceration of numerous prominent activists, including media mogul Jimmy Lai, under the same law. This period of political upheaval led to the dissolution of several civil society groups, including the alliance.