Three Hong Kong activists responsible for organizing annual vigils commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown were sentenced Friday to prison terms ranging from approximately five to seven years. The case is viewed by many as an indicator of the steadily diminishing civil liberties in the city as Beijing intensifies its suppression of dissent.
Lee Cheuk-yan, Chow Hang-tung, and Albert Ho were convicted earlier this year of inciting subversion under the national security law imposed by Beijing. Lee received a seven-year sentence, while Chow was given seven years and three months. Both defendants maintained their innocence throughout the proceedings. Ho, who entered a guilty plea, was handed a lighter term of five years and two months.
The trio had been charged since September 2021 and remained in custody for several years. Hong Kong previously hosted a robust civil society characterized by large-scale protests and an independent press. However, following the 2019 pro-democracy demonstrations, authorities curbed electoral choices and prosecuted editors at critical news organizations. Numerous activists have been jailed under the security legislation, and dozens of civic groups, including the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements, have disbanded.
Beijing maintains that the security law is essential for preserving stability. Lee and Chow have both indicated they will appeal their convictions. Following the sentencing, Lee’s wife, Elizabeth Tang, told reporters that her husband remained composed and was prepared for a harsh outcome. She stated that free speech no longer exists in Hong Kong and that the sentences would provoke shock and outrage, noting that millions of residents have attended or supported the candlelight vigils.
Chow’s mother, Medina Chow Lau Wah-chun, remarked that she felt compelled to thank prosecutors for ensuring that the historical record of the 1989 crackdown and recent events in Hong Kong was preserved in court documents. A friend of Chow’s, Lau Ka-yee, confirmed that Chow would also appeal. Representing herself, Chow had previously argued that seeking democracy should not be criminalized and that she deserved no imprisonment.
Three government-appointed judges ruled that the defendants had committed a serious offense, noting that their longstanding demand to “end one-party dictatorship” implied an intent to undermine the Communist Party’s leadership. While the judges acknowledged that the case did not involve violence and that no specific methods or timelines were proposed, they determined that the defendants’ actions posed a heightened risk to national security amid the volatile social climate. The court asserted that the trial was not motivated by political beliefs but by the defendants’ continued promotion of their agenda after the security law came into force.
Critics argue the trial demonstrates how fundamentally Hong Kong has changed under the new legal framework. These sentences follow the February conviction of former pro-democracy media proprietor Jimmy Lai, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Appeals are likely, but let’s be honest. The odds are stacked against them. Beijing isn’t interested in changing its mind here.
Wait, did the article say the judges acknowledged no violence was planned? Then why are they serving long sentences? Seems contradictory.
I remember when these vigils drew hundreds of thousands. To see the organizers imprisoned now really highlights how much has changed in HK.
Seven years for organizing a peaceful vigil is absolutely outrageous. This is political repression at its finest, not justice.