Verdicts were handed down Thursday morning local time. Sentencing will come at a later date, according to lawyers. The remaining 31 defendants did not contest the charges. After the verdict, Hong Kong’s Department of Justice told the judges it intended to appeal the two acquittals.
Beijing in 2020 imposed a new national security law on Hong Kong — which was supposed to enjoy a level of autonomy under the “one country, two systems” framework — after months-long pro-democracy protests across the city throughout 2019.
The trial, the largest national security case in the former British colony, has been closely watched as a barometer of how far the Beijing-imposed law would be used to punish opposition voices. Judges ruled that those found guilty were planning to undermine the authority of the Hong Kong government, and that their defense was not valid.
GET CAUGHT UP
Summarized stories to quickly stay informed
“The ruling makes clear that the government will no longer tolerate any meaningful opposition,” said Alvin Cheung, assistant professor at Queen’s University in Canada and a former barrister in Hong Kong. “If the lawful use of legislative powers amounts to subversion, one has to wonder whether there remains any scope for dissent in the legislature.”
Together, the defendants represented the full gamut of Hong Kong’s once-thriving pro-democracy opposition — from students to lawyers, veteran activists and relative newcomers, their views ranging from moderate to more radical. Their possible sentences range from three years to life in prison.
The trial has been overseen by three judges handpicked by the government to try national security cases, departing from the tradition under Hong Kong’s common law system of trial by jury. The judges cited the “involvement of foreign elements” as grounds to waive a jury trial.
Among those who pleaded not guilty was Gwyneth Ho, a former journalist who rose to prominence during the 2019 protests, and Leung Kwok-hung, a 68-year-old veteran political and social activist better known as “Long Hair.” The defendants who pleaded guilty to “conspiracy to commit subversion” include 27-year-old activist Joshua Wong and legal scholar Benny Tai, as well as other politicians, former lawmakers and unionists.
The national security law, drafted by Beijing and passed without any consultation in Hong Kong, criminalizes broadly worded crimes such as “secession,” “subversion,” “terrorism” and “collusion with foreign forces.” It has transformed Hong Kong and its institutions — including schools, the media, the legislature and the courts — and has chipped away at the territory’s promised autonomy, which was meant to be preserved until 2047.
Mao Ning, a spokeswoman for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said after the verdicts that Beijing “firmly supports the law enforcement and judicial authorities” of Hong Kong to “punish all kinds of acts that jeopardize national security.”
The unofficial primary election in 2020 was planned and organized before the introduction of the national security law that year. Tai — the legal scholar and activist who also helped launch protests in 2014 that spiraled into a 79-day occupation of city streets — and the others decided to go ahead with the vote after the Beijing-imposed law was put in place. They hoped to secure a majority in the legislature for pro-democracy candidates.
More than 600,000 voters took part in the 2020 citywide primary, but the executive then decided to delay the legislative election, citing issues related to the coronavirus pandemic. Critics have argued that the prosecution’s case is based largely on hypotheticals, as the defendants did not have a chance to run in the legislative election, let alone take office and then subvert the system, as alleged.
Some worry, too, that the ruling could have implications beyond those defendants. Small shops, for example, allowed their spaces to be used as venues for the unofficial primary and could find themselves implicated.
“The authorities could use the case as jurisprudence to accuse people who [rented] their shops to become makeshift polling stations and volunteers who [ran] the stations as co-conspirators,” said Michael Mo, a former district councilor in Hong Kong who now lives in exile in the United Kingdom. Amid the increasingly tight environment for dissent in Hong Kong, “presumption of innocence is no longer there,” Mo said.
This March, Hong Kong’s legislature, scrubbed of opposition, unanimously passed a new package of domestically focused national security laws, known as Article 23, that further squeezed what little space remained for criticism and civil liberties.
Ahead of Thursday’s verdict, one of the two acquitted defendants, Lee Yue Shun, wrote in a Facebook post that the ruling would do little to change the reality of life in Hong Kong.
“Regardless of the outcome, the preservation of the legitimacy of the Hong Kong people’s way of life has already been faced with the most difficult challenges on a daily basis,” he wrote.
