Hong Kong Tiananmen vigil organisers convicted in national security case

A Hong Kong court convicted Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung over the alliance's Tiananmen vigil slogan. The ruling deepens concerns over free expression as the city's pro-democracy space narrows.

In Short

• The defendants pleaded not guilty and could face up to 10 years
• Judges said the alliance slogan amounted to undermining Communist Party rule
• Hong Kong's annual June 4 vigil had drawn tens of thousands

Two former organisers of Hong Kong’s annual Tiananmen Square vigil have been convicted of inciting subversion under the city’s national security law, in a ruling seen as another major case linked to the clampdown on the 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 found guilty along with the alliance itself.

The two had pleaded not guilty to charges filed in 2021 and face a maximum prison term of 10 years. They are to be sentenced later, and one of the judges said they would make pleas for lighter sentences next week. The verdict comes as Hong Kong’s once-vibrant pro-democracy movement has been largely dismantled since Beijing imposed the security law in 2020.

Government-approved judges ruled that the alliance’s slogan, "end one-party dictatorship", was not a call for the ruling Communist Party to return to a system of multiparty cooperation under the constitution, but a call to end the party’s leadership status under the constitution. They said the word "end" in the phrase meant "overthrowing" and "undermining".

In the verdict, the judges said the defendants continued using the slogan after the security law came into force, despite it being inconsistent with the constitution, which says the party’s leadership is an essential characteristic of socialism with Chinese characteristics. They said this fell within "other unlawful means" under the security law. "(The defendants) intentionally encouraged supporters of the alliance to wait for the right time to carry out the goal of ending one-party dictatorship with unlawful means," the judges said.

Lee and Chow smiled and waved at the public gallery before leaving the courtroom. When the trial began in January, co-defendant Albert Ho pleaded guilty, a move that can usually lead to a reduced sentence. He is awaiting sentencing.

For decades, Hong Kong’s annual candlelight vigil was the only large public commemoration of the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown and drew tens of thousands of people every year. On the Chinese mainland, discussion of the crackdown remains tightly censored and public commemorations are banned. Under Beijing’s "one country, two systems" framework, Hong Kong had greater political freedoms that allowed the vigil to continue until authorities banned it during the coronavirus pandemic.

Observers said the trial reflected the erosion of freedom of expression in the former British colony, which returned to Chinese rule in 1997. Eric Lai, a senior fellow with the Georgetown Centre for Asian Law, said the charge of inciting subversion had often been used in mainland China against human rights lawyers, activists and intellectuals, including late Nobel laureate Liu Xiaobo. "We can see to what extent the court in Hong Kong falls into the level of the party-led judiciary in the mainland through the criminal verdict," he said.

During the trial, Lee told the court that the slogan was not about ending the party’s leadership, but about moving towards democracy and letting people decide who leads them, and that the Communist Party should not enforce "dictatorship". In a Patreon post on Thursday, Chow recalled being taken from prison to court in handcuffs and waist and ankle chains, saying correctional service officers walked her "like a dog". She wrote, "Justice lives in the hearts of the people. There is no need to look up to this kind of top-down ruling, and one verdict doesn’t matter much."

After the conviction, Lee’s wife Elizabeth Tang told reporters she was disappointed and angry, though she had expected the result. She said Lee was innocent. "I feel it’s unfair. I feel the judges did not consider our lawyers’ opinions and materials," she said, adding that they would decide later whether to appeal. Chow’s mother, Medina Chow Lau Wah-chun, said she hoped the "environment can be a little healthier" and added, "Flowers and plants of all colours can bloom."

Dozens of people queued outside the court in drizzling rain before the hearing. Tang Ngok-kwan, a former alliance member, said police would not let him join the queue if he brought "sensitive" materials, including bookmarks carrying the words "vindicate June 4", the anniversary date of the crackdown. He said he then decided not to enter the court. Former vigil attendee Margaret Chan, who joined the queue at 6 am, said the alliance’s name itself included the word "patriotic". "Everyone is patriotic. How to incite? Incite others to be patriotic?" she said.

Hundreds, and possibly thousands, were killed in the 1989 crackdown when military tanks rolled into central Beijing. After COVID-19 restrictions were lifted, the former vigil site in Hong Kong was instead used for a carnival organised by pro-Beijing groups. Beijing has said the 2020 security law was necessary for the city’s stability. Many leading activists, including former media tycoon Jimmy Lai, have been jailed under the law, and dozens of civil society groups, including the alliance, have dissolved. The ruling against Lee, Chow and the alliance adds to that wider shift in Hong Kong’s political and civic landscape.

With PTI Inputs

- Ends