Two previous organizers of Hong Kong’s long-standing vigil to commemorate the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown were found guilty on Friday in a national security case brought under a law imposed by China, effectively quashing the city’s once-thriving 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 for inciting subversion under the national security law. Despite pleading not guilty, they could face up to 10 years in prison. The alliance was also held accountable for the charges.
The judges determined that the alliance’s call to “end one-party dictatorship” sought not to restore the system of multiparty cooperation under the constitution but to eradicate the party’s leadership status under the constitution. They interpreted the term “end” in the call as indicating “overthrowing” and “undermining.”
The verdict clarified that the defendants persisted with the call post-law enactment, disregarding that it contradicted the constitution, which designates the party’s leadership as a fundamental aspect of socialism with Chinese characteristics. This was deemed as falling under “other unlawful means” according to the security law, as outlined by the judges.
This ruling is part of the ongoing legal actions against Hong Kong’s former pro-democracy movement, which has been significantly weakened by both Hong Kong and Chinese authorities.
For thirty years, the candlelight vigil organized by the alliance was the primary public event attracting tens of thousands annually to mourn the victims in China. The event was prohibited in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, shortly before Beijing imposed the security law on Hong Kong to suppress the 2019 anti-government protests.
Lee and Chow, who smiled and waved at the spectators before leaving the courtroom, await sentencing on a later date. They will seek reduced sentences next week, as mentioned by one of the judges.
Their trial is seen as emblematic of the diminishing freedom of expression in the former British colony, which reverted to Chinese sovereignty in 1997.
Eric Lai, a senior fellow at the Georgetown Center for Asian Law, noted that the charge of inciting subversion is commonly used in mainland China to criminalize the actions of human rights defenders, activists, and intellectuals. He emphasized the resemblance between the Hong Kong court’s ruling and the party-led judiciary in mainland China.
During the trial, prosecutors emphasized that the case was not politically motivated but focused on what they perceived as the alliance’s incitement to overthrow the leadership of China’s ruling Communist Party through illegal means, citing their call to “end one-party rule” as a core demand.
Lee explained to the court that the call advocated for democratic progress, allowing the populace to choose their leaders, and criticized the imposition of “dictatorship” by the Communist Party.
Chow, acting as her own defense, argued that “ending one-party rule” signified putting an end to unchecked power. She criticized the reversal of the standards for determining right and wrong in this case.
Following the conviction, Lee’s wife expressed disappointment and anger at the outcome, maintaining Lee’s innocence and highlighting their potential decision to appeal later.
Supporters of Lee and Chow gathered outside the court ahead of the hearing, with one former alliance member expressing disbelief at the potential guilty verdict, stating that it would challenge his understanding of the city’s legal system.
The 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown remains a significant event in modern Chinese history, signifying a turning point where political liberalization did not accompany the economic reforms that propelled China into becoming the world’s second-largest economy.
The introduction of the 2020 security law in Hong Kong was justified by Beijing as necessary for the city’s stability. Numerous prominent activists, including media tycoon Jimmy Lai, were imprisoned under this law, leading to the dissolution of several civil society groups, including the alliance.