Two prominent Hong Kong activists who organized annual vigils to commemorate the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown have been found guilty of inciting others to subvert state power under the city’s national security law, according to BBC News.
Tiananmen Activists Found Guilty of Inciting Subversion
Lee Cheuk-yan, 69, and Chow Hang-tung, 41, leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, were convicted after pleading not guilty. A press summary handed out to reporters stated that the defendants incited other persons to organise, plan, commit or participate in acts by unlawful means with a view to subverting the state power,
as reported by Straitstimes. A third defendant, 74-year-old former lawmaker Albert Ho, had pleaded guilty in January, as detailed by RTL. The alliance itself was also found guilty, according to CW39.
Legal Proceedings and Penalties
The defendants face a maximum penalty of 10 years in jail following their conviction by a three-judge panel, with sentencing expected at a later date. Prosecutors argued that the defendants endanger(ed) national security in the name of human rights
and maintained that the case focused on calls by the alliance to incite the overthrow of China’s ruling Communist Party leadership through unlawful means, pointing to core demands such as ending one-party rule.
During the trial, which spanned 24 days, Chow represented herself and told the court that the law itself was on trial, noting that sooner or later the law will have to confront the fundamental contradiction between dictatorship and the rule of law.
Lawyer Erik Shum, representing Lee, argued that criticism of state organs is protected under China’s constitution and that the prosecution provided no evidence that the group incited actions to topple the party using unlawful means.
Historical Context of the Victoria Park Vigils
For three decades, the Hong Kong Alliance organized annual candlelight vigils in Victoria Park that drew tens of thousands of people annually to mourn the victims of the military crackdown in Beijing on June 4, 1989. Hong Kong and Macau were formerly the only places on Chinese soil that permitted public commemorations of the event.
Public vigils were banned beginning in 2020 during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, shortly before Beijing imposed the national security law on Hong Kong following massive anti-government protests in 2019. The alliance’s leaders were charged in 2021 and have remained behind bars since that time.
Broader Implications for Freedom of Expression
Observers have noted that the trial symbolizes the broader erosion of freedom of expression in the former British colony, which returned to Chinese rule in 1997. Rights group Amnesty International stated that the case relies on vague, overly broad and arbitrary definitions of 'subversion'.
Legal scholar Michael Davis told AFP that the case sends a strong message to speakers who want to exercise freedom of expression through popular protests, comparing its impact to the case of media tycoon Jimmy Lai. Meanwhile, Eric Lai, a senior fellow with the Georgetown Center for Asian Law, noted that the charge of inciting subversion has frequently been used in mainland China to criminalize human rights defenders, activists, and intellectuals.
