A Hong Kong court on Friday sentenced three prominent pro-democracy activists who organized the city's annual Tiananmen Square candlelight vigils to prison terms ranging from five to over seven years. The landmark ruling under Beijing's national security law is widely seen as a significant indicator of the rapid decline of civil liberties and political dissent in the semi-autonomous Chinese territory.
The defendants—Lee Cheuk-yan, Chow Hang-tung, and Albert Ho—were convicted of inciting subversion earlier this year. Lee received a seven-year prison sentence, while Chow was sentenced to seven years and three months. Both had pleaded not guilty to the charges. Ho, who pleaded guilty, received a shorter sentence of five years and two months. All three individuals were originally charged in September 2021 and have already spent several years in custody.
The three activists served as leaders of the now-dissolved Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China. For more than three decades, the alliance organized the annual June 4 candlelight vigil at Victoria Park in Causeway Bay, commemorating those killed during the 1989 military crackdown on student-led pro-democracy protests in Beijing's Tiananmen Square. The event, which regularly drew tens of thousands of participants, was the only large-scale public commemoration of the crackdown permitted on Chinese soil. However, Hong Kong authorities banned the gathering in 2020, citing the coronavirus pandemic.
During the sentencing, the three government-approved judges stated that the defendants had committed a serious offense. The court had previously determined that the alliance's long-standing political slogan, "end one-party dictatorship," carried an implicit intent to overthrow or undermine the leadership of the ruling Chinese Communist Party. While the judges acknowledged that the case did not involve violence or threats of violence, and that the alliance had never proposed a specific timetable or physical means to achieve its goal, they argued that the activities occurred during a period of turbulent social atmosphere, which posed a heightened risk to national security. The judges insisted in their written ruling that the defendants were not being prosecuted for their political opinions. They noted that even when the defendants believed their political agenda might violate the constitution and the national security law, they acted recalcitrantly and continued to vigorously promote their cause after the law was enacted.
Following the court's decision, family members and supporters expressed deep disappointment and anger. Elizabeth Tang, the wife of Lee Cheuk-yan, told reporters that her husband was prepared for the worst and appeared calm during the proceedings. She confirmed that Lee plans to appeal the verdict. Tang criticized the state of civil liberties in the city, stating that freedom of speech no longer exists in Hong Kong and that the harsh sentences would shock and anger many. She added that because millions of people had attended or supported the annual vigils over the decades, the sentence feels like a punishment directed at many other citizens as well.
Medina Chow Lau Wah-chun, the mother of Chow Hang-tung, sarcastically thanked the prosecution, joking that their legal actions had helped preserve the historical truth of both the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown and Hong Kong's recent political struggles within official court records. She remarked that her daughter had long desired to have a proper debate with authorities. Lau Ka-yee, a friend of Chow, confirmed that Chow also intends to appeal her sentence. Chow, who represented herself during the trial, had previously argued that the court's verdict implied that the pursuit of democracy itself is a crime, maintaining that she did not deserve to spend a single day in prison.
The defense team during the trial denied that the defendants intended to overthrow the ruling party, emphasizing that the alliance had never encouraged the public to use illegal methods. Lee had argued that the call to "end one-party dictatorship" was a plea for democratic reforms, allowing citizens to choose their own leaders.
In response to international and local criticism of the verdict, the Hong Kong office of China's foreign ministry issued a statement asserting that no individual should be allowed to conduct illegal activities under the guise of freedom of speech or freedom of the press. Meanwhile, Steve Li, the chief superintendent of the police's national security department, warned that anyone planning similar actions should heed the court's sentences and recognize the government's absolute resolve to protect national security.
Legal experts also commented on the broader implications of the ruling. Urania Chiu, a law lecturer at Oxford Brookes University in the United Kingdom, observed that the guilty verdicts confirm that peaceful advocacy for democratic reforms in China has been effectively criminalized in Hong Kong. She noted that the mere potential for activities to stir up public hostility against the state by recalling past historical atrocities is now sufficient for courts to classify an offense as serious.
The sentencing attracted significant public attention, with dozens of people queuing outside the courthouse to secure seats, filling the main courtroom and overflow rooms. Among those in the public gallery was Roman Catholic Cardinal Joseph Zen, who was arrested under the national security law in 2022 but never prosecuted. High-profile activists Jimmy Sham and Carol Ng, both of whom have served prison sentences in a separate national security case, were also present.
For former vigil participants, the verdict brought personal distress. Simon Ng, a resident who attended the Victoria Park vigils for decades, described a heavy heart ahead of the sentencing, stating that the court's decision felt like a direct accusation against him and the millions of others who had peacefully gathered to remember the victims of the 1989 crackdown.
HONG KONG — Three Hong Kong activists who organized annual vigils in remembrance of China's 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown were sentenced Friday to about 5 to 7 years in prison in a case widely seen as a barometer of the city's eroding freedoms as Beijing clamps down on dissent.
Lee received a 7-year prison term and Chow was sentenced to 7 years and 3 months. Both pleaded not guilty. Ho was given a lower sentence of 5 years and 2 months, partly because he pleaded guilty.
