Hong Kong
CNN
—
More than 40 of Hong Kong’s best known pro-democracy figures have been sentenced to prison terms of up to 10 years on subversion charges, in the biggest single blow to the city’s already shrinking political freedoms following Beijing’s sweeping crackdown on dissent.
Among those handed sentences on Tuesday was Joshua Wong, a former student leader and poster child of the city’s once thriving pro-democracy movement, who shouted “I love Hong Kong” before he left the dock.
All 45 defendants – including former high-profile lawmakers, activists, unionists and journalists – received prison sentences ranging from 50 months to 10 years at the West Kowloon court in the largest single prosecution to date under a national security law imposed by Beijing in 2020.
Beijing ramped up its crackdown on opposition voices in the once free-wheeling city after huge and sometimes violent pro-democracy protests convulsed the international financial hub in 2019.
Tuesday’s mass sentencing illustrates how far that transformation has progressed, turning an outspoken city of 7.5 million, where protests were once common, into something resembling a mirror of the authoritarian Chinese mainland with a who’s who of opposition figures behind bars and other critical voices silenced or fled overseas.
Prominent legal scholar Benny Tai, who was labled by the judges as the “mastermind” and “principal offender,” received the longest prison term of 10 years – the toughest sentence to date handed down under the national security law. Wong, the student leader, received 4 years and 8 months behind bars. Both had not been seen in public for a long time and appeared to have lost weight.
Gwyneth Ho, a former journalist famous for live-streaming protests in 2019, was sentenced to 7 years; former lawmaker Leung Kwok-hung, known by the nickname “Long Hair” and for his decades-long advocacy for democracy in the city, got 6 years and 9 months; and Claudia Mo, a former journalist-turned-legislator, was sentenced to 4 years and 2 months.
In the packed court gallery, some family members and friends teared up as the sentences were handed down; others tried to stay in high spirits, smiling and waving at the defendants, who gestured back.
Outside the court, a woman was immediately taken away in a police car after trying to display a banner at the exit after the hearing.
The group, which originally had 47 defendants, had been charged with “conspiracy to commit subversion” for their roles in holding an unofficial primary election in 2020 to improve their chances in citywide polls.
But city leaders, police and prosecutors argued the democratic primary amounted to a “massive and well-organized scheme to subvert the Hong Kong government.”
In their ruling Tuesday, the judges said that had the defendants’ plan “been carried out to the very end, the adverse consequences would be far reaching and no less serious than overthrowing the government.”
In May, the court convicted 14 who contested the accusations while 31 others pleaded guilty, a move to secure a lighter sentence. Only two were acquitted.
Landmark prosecution
Known widely as the trial of the “Hong Kong 47,” the landmark prosecution was closely watched by human rights groups and foreign governments concerned about sweeping changes in the once pluralistic business hub.
More than 300 people queued in light rain outside the court on Tuesday morning – many of them before dawn – to secure a seat and show support for the defendants. Police maintained a massive presence outside court and picked out prominent activists to search.
Among those in queue was former district councilor Lee Yue-shun, one of the two acquitted defendants. “Everyone should care about all the defendants,” he said.
Hong Kong, a former British colony, was returned to Chinese rule in 1997 under a special arrangement with Beijing granting the city autonomy and wide-ranging freedoms unavailable in mainland China.
But since the national security law came into effect in 2020, Hong Kong’s political and legal landscape has been transformed. Most pro-democracy figures are either in prison or in self-imposed exile, a slew of civil groups have disbanded and many independent media outlets shut down. Beijing also overhauled Hong Kong’s political system to ensure only staunch “patriots” can stand for office.
The Hong Kong and Beijing governments have repeatedly defended the national security law’s imposition, arguing that “restored stability” after the mass, sometimes violent, anti-government protests that shook the city in 2019.
The US government and multiple western nations – as well as human rights groups – say the law has been deployed to curb peaceful dissent.
During US President-elect Donald Trump’s first term, Washington sanctioned Chinese and Hong Kong officials over the crackdown and declared the city no longer enjoyed a high degree of autonomy from China.
The administration of outgoing US President Joe Biden was also critical of Bejing’s crackdown in Hong Kong, even as it tried to recalibrate ties with Beijing.
Trump won re-election earlier this month and has announced a proposed cabinet stacked with multiple China hawks.
While Hong Kong has never been granted full “one person, one vote” democracy, citizens were allowed to elect half of its lawmakers, giving rise to a robust opposition that grilled officials rigorously at the Legislative Council, which is now a legacy of the past.
The city’s current legislature, which the 47 originally wanted to win a majority in, now comprises only pro-Beijing loyalists. Citizens may vote for only 20 members of the 90-strong Legislative Council through direction elections. A pro-Beijing group is responsible for electing 40 members, the majority of the council, with the balance voted in by professional groups, most of which are pro-Beijing leaning. All lawmakers are also vetted for their patriotism before being allowed to stand.
In March, Hong Kong lawmakers unanimously passed a second national security law expanding legislation to cover acts of treason, espionage, external interference and unlawful handling of state secrets, following an unusually hasty debate that lasted just 11 days.
John Burns, emeritus professor at the University of Hong Kong, said the cumulative changes have reduced the city’s autonomy and citizens’ participation in politics.
“The new regime has restricted human rights in Hong Kong, rights that Hong Kongers used to enjoy. Authorities have implemented what amounts to a general ban on protests and demonstrations,” he said.
Beijing and Hong Kong authorities have argued that the changes have made the city more efficient in policymaking, given past attempts by the opposition to filibuster the government’s more controversial bills.
Protests have also all but stopped. Hong Kong was once known for a variety of protests that took place almost every month to lobby for a wide range of causes, from labor rights to greater democracy, something that has long been impossible on the Chinese mainland where the ruling Communist Party prizes stability.
Last month a former minister suggested encouraging some toleration for protests might improve Hong Kong’s international reputation and show the city maintained some political inclusivity.
The suggestion received a swift response from city leader John Lee – a former security minister.
“Inclusion should not depend on protests and assemblies,” Lee said. “This is a very narrow-minded point of view. There are many ways to express an opinion, such as through seminars – there is no single avenue.”
