In Hong Kong, former organizers of annual vigils commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown were convicted for inciting others to overthrow China’s communist leadership. Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung, former leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, faced charges under a national security law imposed by Beijing in 2021. The law has effectively quashed the city’s pro-democracy movement. They could receive up to 10 years in prison.
Three judges ruled that the alliance’s call to “end one-party dictatorship” aimed to undermine the ruling Communist Party’s leadership as defined by the Constitution. The word “end” in their slogan was interpreted as “overthrow” and “undermine.” The ruling stated that the defendants continued their call after the law took effect, ignoring its contradiction with the Constitution, which identifies party leadership as a key socialist feature. This was considered “other illicit means” under the law.
The judges claimed the defendants deliberately encouraged alliance supporters to bide their time to achieve the goal of “ending one-party dictatorship” through illegal means. They insisted the defendants did not genuinely believe their actions complied with the national security law. The judges noted that their political views were not the subject of the trial.
Before leaving the courtroom, Lee and Chow smiled and waved to the gallery. Their sentence will be announced at a later date, and they will request lighter penalties next week, as stated by one of the judges. Observers view the trial as a measure of civil rights.
The verdict is among the latest involving the once-active pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong, largely dismantled since the security law’s introduction in 2020. For decades, the annual candlelight vigil in Hong Kong was the only large-scale public commemoration of the Tiananmen crackdown in China, attracting tens of thousands each year. This repression remains a political taboo in mainland China, where censorship is strong and public commemorations are forbidden.
Hong Kong’s political freedoms under Beijing’s “one country, two systems” framework allowed the vigil until authorities banned it during the coronavirus pandemic. Observers noted that the trial symbolizes the erosion of free expression in the former British colony, handed over to China in 1997.
Eric Lai, a senior researcher at Georgetown Center for Asian Law, remarked that any civil society actor in Hong Kong who believed that avoiding violence and adhering to the law would suffice must reconsider. “Moderation of method provides no protection if the goal itself is deemed unconstitutional,” he said.
During the trial, Lee testified that their call did not target ending party leadership, but sought the advancement of democracy, allowing people to choose their leaders, and contending that the Communist Party should not impose a “dictatorship.”
In a post on Patreon, Chow reflected on being transported in chains from prison to court and described prison staff treating her “like a dog.” She stated, “Justice resides in people’s hearts. A verdict matters little.”
At the trial’s outset in January, another defendant, Albert Hom, pleaded guilty, usually leading to a reduced sentence. He too will request leniency next week. Supporters question the charges.
Following the conviction, Lee’s wife, Elizabeth Tang, expressed disappointment and anger at the outcome. “I find it unfair. I feel the judges didn’t consider our lawyers’ viewpoints and materials,” she noted, adding they would decide on an appeal later.
Chow’s mother, Medina Chow Lau Wah-chun, hoped for a “healthier environment” where “flowers and plants of all colors could flourish.”
Dozens queued outside the court under drizzle before the hearing. Former alliance member Tang Ngok-kwan shared that police denied lining up if he insisted on carrying “sensitive” materials, including markers printed with “vindicate June 4.” The date marks the anniversary of Tiananmen Square crackdown, prompting Tang not to enter the court.
Margaret Chan, a past vigil attendee who queued at 6 a.m., questioned, “Everyone is patriotic. How does one incite? Incite others to be patriotic?” Hong Kong authorities defend the verdict.
Hong Kong leader, John Lee, contended he long believed the alliance deliberately sowed seeds of hatred against the party and central government in society, endangering national security. Steve Li, Chief Superintendent of the police’s national security department, stated the case aids future law enforcement.
Riley Barnes, U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, condemned the guilty verdict on the platform X, asserting that peaceful vigils aimed to remember the past and honor lives lost during the crackdown.
Rosie Winterton, UK Minister for the Indo-Pacific, remarked that even peaceful commemorative acts in Hong Kong now face national security threat designation by authorities. The European Union emphasized that the convictions confirm the ongoing decline of free expression in the city.
The Tiananmen Square crackdown saw hundreds, possibly thousands, killed when military tanks advanced into Beijing’s center. This repression marked a significant point in China’s modern history, illustrating that market reforms transforming the nation into the world’s second largest economy would not bring political liberalization.
After COVID-19 restrictions lifted, pro-Beijing groups used the vigil’s former location for a carnival instead. Beijing claims the security law ensures the city’s stability. Many prominent activists, including pro-democracy media mogul Jimmy Lai, faced imprisonment under the law, prompting drastic political shifts in Hong Kong and dissolution of civil society groups like the alliance.