The High Court today found former Hong Kong Alliance chair Lee Cheuk-yan and former vice-chair Chow Hang-tung guilty of “inciting others to subvert state power”. The case has been adjourned until Friday (28 August) for mitigation. We strongly condemn the verdict and are deeply concerned that the case further demonstrates how Hong Kong’s National Security Law is being used to erode long-standing freedoms of expression and association, and to narrow the space for peaceful political advocacy.
Christopher Mung, Executive Director of Hong Kong Labour Rights Monitor, said:
“Today’s verdict is not simply a conviction of Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung. It is also a blatant conviction of conscience and truth. For more than three decades, the Hong Kong Alliance promoted democratic ideals through peaceful and non-violent means. To now characterise such advocacy as incitement to subvert state power sends a deeply disturbing message to the world: that there is no longer room in Hong Kong for peaceful dissent or political expression.”
At the heart of the case was not whether the defendants had planned violence, a coup or any unlawful attempt to seize power. The prosecution instead focused on one of the Alliance’s five long-standing objectives: “ending one-party dictatorship”. It argued that, as chair and vice-chair of the Alliance, Lee and Chow were necessarily involved in efforts to subvert state power through unconstitutional and unlawful means.
Yet the prosecution failed to identify any specific unlawful means that Lee or Chow had advocated, or to establish that either defendant had planned or incited violence. Much of the case centred on statements they had made publicly. This verdict therefore clearly amounts to criminalising people for what they say, dealing another severe blow to Hong Kong’s already threatened freedom of expression. iving evidence in court, Lee recalled how Beijing residents helped him escape Tiananmen Square 37 years ago, enabling him to leave safely. He told the court that seeking justice for the victims of the Tiananmen crackdown and building a democratic China had become his lifelong commitment. “There is no hatred in my heart, only love for the people,” he said.
Chow described the annual June 4 candlelight vigil in Victoria Park as an expression of “love and responsibility”, rather than hatred. Both defendants repeatedly stressed that the Alliance advocated constitutional reform, democratic institutions, the rule of law and checks and balances on power, but not the violent overthrow of the government.
For more than three decades, the Alliance organised the annual June 4 candlelight vigil in Victoria Park peacefully, calling for accountability for the Tiananmen crackdown and keeping alive the aspirations of its victims for democratic reform. For many years, Hong Kong was the only place in China where the events of June 4 could be openly commemorated and discussed.
Hong Kong once allowed people to commemorate June 4 publicly, debate political systems and advocate for political reform. Today, forms of peaceful public expression that were once part of Hong Kong’s civic life can instead be treated as matters of national security.
This verdict is therefore about more than the Hong Kong Alliance. It is a further example of the criminalisation of civil society in Hong Kong and the shrinking space for peaceful political and civic participation.
History must not become a forbidden subject, and peaceful political advocacy must not be treated as a crime.
We urge the Hong Kong authorities to respect the fundamental rights protected under the Basic Law and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to stop using national security offences to suppress peaceful political expression, and to ensure that people can express their views, participate in public debate and advocate peacefully for reform without fear of criminal prosecution.
We also call on the international community to continue monitoring the human rights and rule of law situation in Hong Kong, and to maintain close scrutiny of this case and others involving people who have peacefully exercised their fundamental rights.