Hong Kong’s High Court on Aug. 21 convicted the now-disbanded Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China and two of its former leaders of inciting subversion under Beijing’s National Security Law.
The Hong Kong Alliance, commonly known by its Chinese abbreviation 支联会, was one of the city’s most prominent pro-democracy organizations. For decades, it organized Hong Kong’s annual candlelight vigils commemorating the victims of the Chinese Communist Party’s 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. The gatherings, which routinely drew tens of thousands of people, were once the only large-scale public commemorations of the crackdown permitted on Chinese soil.
According to Reuters, the High Court found former Alliance chairman Lee Cheuk-yan and former vice chairwoman Chow Hang-tung guilty of inciting subversion. The Alliance itself was also convicted. The three national security judges focused in particular on the group’s longstanding call to “end one-party dictatorship,” ruling that the slogan sought to undermine the Chinese Communist Party’s constitutionally established leadership. Lee and Chow, who have been detained since 2021, face sentences of up to 10 years in prison.
Albert Ho, another former chairman of the Alliance and a former leader of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party, had pleaded guilty to the same charge before the trial began. The Hong Kong government confirmed the convictions in an Aug. 21 press release, saying the case would proceed to mitigation hearings.
Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council responded to the verdict with what it described as “deep regret and distress,” calling on the Chinese Communist Party and the Hong Kong government to stop what it characterized as political persecution and immediately release those detained in connection with the case. The council said the Alliance had peacefully commemorated the June 4 crackdown and advocated democracy and freedom for decades, while accusing authorities of increasingly using national security laws and the judicial system to suppress dissent.
For the best of our weekly content！
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Check your email to complete sign up
Charged with inciting subversion; case lasted nearly five years
According to the charges, the Hong Kong Alliance, Lee Cheuk-yan, Chow Hang-tung, and Albert Ho were accused of inciting others in Hong Kong, between July 1, 2020, and Sept. 8, 2021, to organize, plan, carry out, or participate in acts intended to subvert state power through unlawful means.
The prosecution alleged that those acts included efforts to overthrow or undermine the fundamental state system established under China’s Constitution or to overthrow the central organs of state power.
When the trial began earlier this year, Ho pleaded guilty to the charge, while Lee and Chow pleaded not guilty. The Hong Kong Alliance, which had dissolved in September 2021, was represented by senior counsel appointed through the Official Receiver’s Office and also entered a not-guilty plea.
Closing arguments concluded in May, and the court handed down its verdict on Aug. 21.
‘Ending one-party rule’ becomes focus of trial
During the trial, the Hong Kong Alliance’s longstanding political platform became a central point of dispute between prosecutors and the defense. Prosecutors focused particularly on one of the group’s five stated goals—“ending one-party rule”—arguing that it amounted to a call to overthrow China’s fundamental political system and central state institutions and therefore constituted incitement to subversion.
Lee Cheuk-yan’s defense counsel rejected that interpretation, arguing that the slogan was principally a rejection of “dictatorship” rather than a straightforward call to overthrow the Chinese Communist Party. The defense maintained that the Alliance’s position was that no political party should govern through dictatorial means.
The case unfolded against the sweeping political changes that followed Beijing’s imposition of the Hong Kong National Security Law in 2020. Several senior Alliance members were subsequently arrested and prosecuted, while the organization itself dissolved in September 2021.
The Aug. 21 convictions of the Hong Kong Alliance, Lee, and Chow mark the latest development in a national security case that has stretched on for years. The prosecution and prolonged detention of the defendants have drawn sustained scrutiny from international human rights groups and overseas observers concerned about the erosion of civil liberties, political freedoms, and the rule of law in Hong Kong.
Mainland Affairs Council urges Hong Kong to protect freedoms, end national security crackdown
Responding to the Hong Kong court’s verdict, Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council said on Aug. 21 that it felt “deep regret and distress” over the convictions of the Hong Kong Alliance, Lee Cheuk-yan, and Chow Hang-tung for inciting subversion, according to a media release issued by the council on Friday.
The council said the Hong Kong Alliance had spent decades peacefully commemorating the June 4, 1989, Tiananmen Square crackdown and advocating democracy and freedom. It criticized the use of the National Security Law to prosecute the organization’s political positions as “incitement to subversion,” noting that the proceedings lasted nearly five years while the defendants remained in prolonged detention. The council said the case had heightened concerns about the continuing deterioration of human rights and the rule of law in Hong Kong.
The Mainland Affairs Council also stressed that a sound legal system, freedom of speech and thought, and the protection of fundamental human rights are essential to Hong Kong’s continued prosperity and stability and to maintaining its position as an international financial center.
It called on the governments of mainland China and Hong Kong to immediately release those detained in connection with the case, end what it described as the suppression of dissent and political persecution carried out in the name of national security, and respond to calls within Hong Kong for stronger protections for human rights, freedoms, and the rule of law.
Original article
Comments