Two ex-organizers of Hong Kong’s annual vigil commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown have been found guilty in a national security case related to a law imposed by China that has severely impacted the city’s 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 charged in 2021 with inciting subversion under the national security law. Both had pleaded not guilty and could face up to 10 years in prison. The judges concluded that the alliance’s call to “end one-party dictatorship” was not just a demand for the ruling Communist Party to return to a multiparty system but aimed at removing its leadership status under the constitution. The judges stated that persisting in this call after the law’s enactment, despite it being unconstitutional as per the party’s leadership being a fundamental aspect of socialism with Chinese characteristics, constituted “other unlawful means” under the security law.
This ruling is part of the ongoing crackdown on Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement, which has been significantly weakened by local and Chinese authorities. The annual candlelight vigil organized by the alliance, which used to draw tens of thousands of attendees to mourn the Tiananmen Square victims, was banned in 2020 due to the pandemic and shortly before the introduction of the security law following the 2019 anti-government protests.
Observers view the trial of Lee and Chow as a sign of the diminishing freedom of expression in the territory since its handover from British to Chinese rule in 1997. The sentencing of the convicted individuals is expected to take place at a later date, with potential pleas for reduced penalties in the upcoming week. The full judgment of the court’s decision will be made available online.
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 and intellectuals. During the trial, prosecutors emphasized that the case was not politically motivated but focused on the alleged incitement by the alliance to overthrow the Communist Party’s leadership through unlawful means. However, Lee clarified that their objective was not to eliminate the party’s leadership but to progress towards democracy and let the people choose their leaders without enforcing dictatorship.
Chow, who represented herself in court, explained that “ending one-party rule” was about terminating unrestricted power and criticized the reversal of the standards of right and wrong in their case. The trial, originally scheduled for 75 days, concluded earlier than anticipated and involved a guilty plea from another defendant, Albert Ho. Lee and Chow are anticipated to request reduced sentences in a subsequent hearing and may be sentenced alongside Ho.
Following the verdict, Lee’s wife expressed disappointment and disagreement with the outcome, emphasizing Lee’s innocence and questioning the judges’ consideration of the defense’s arguments and evidence. Supporters outside the court voiced concerns regarding the implications of a guilty verdict for the alliance on the city’s legal framework.
The Tiananmen Square crackdown in 1989 resulted in the loss of numerous lives and marked a crucial moment in modern Chinese history, indicating that economic reforms would not be accompanied by political liberalization. Following the relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions, the traditional vigil site in Hong Kong was replaced by a carnival organized by pro-Beijing groups. Beijing defended the implementation of the 2020 security law as necessary for the city’s stability, leading to the imprisonment of several prominent activists, including media mogul Jimmy Lai, under the same legislation and the dissolution of numerous civil society organizations, including the alliance.