Hong Kong Court Convicts Tiananmen Vigil Leaders Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung of Inciting Subversion

Subversion verdict and penalties

A three-judge panel in Hong Kong convicted activists Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung on Friday of incitement to subversion under the national security law. The court found that the two defendants incited others to organise, plan, commit, or participate in acts by unlawful means to subvert state power. Judges ruled that their conduct constituted an attempt at overthrowing or undermining the basic system established by the Constitution of China. Lee, 69, and Chow, 41, sat silently in the dock as the verdict was delivered. Both activists face a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, with formal sentencing scheduled for a later date. A third defendant, 74-year-old former lawmaker Albert Ho, previously pleaded guilty in January.

Dissolution of the Hong Kong Alliance

Lee and Chow previously served as leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, which formed in May 1989 to support student-led pro-democracy demonstrations in Beijing. Following the crackdown by Chinese troops and tanks on June 4, 1989, the group organised annual candlelight vigils in Victoria Park for three decades. Hong Kong and Macau were the only territories on Chinese soil where public commemorations of the Tiananmen crackdown were permitted. Authorities banned the gatherings in 2020, citing pandemic restrictions, before Beijing enacted the national security law later that year. The Alliance voted to dissolve in September 2021 after police demanded operational and financial records while accusing the organization of acting as a foreign agent.

Testimonies and activist backgrounds

Lee, a veteran labor activist and former lawmaker, chaired the Alliance and travelled to Beijing in late May 1989 to deliver donations from Hong Kong residents. During the June crackdown, he heard gunfire from his hotel room before authorities detained him at the airport and released him on June 8 after questioning and the signing of a repentance letter. In court, Lee stated that his advocacy aimed for political reform rather than hostility toward the ruling party.

I have no enmity in my heart, only love.

Chow, a Cambridge natural sciences graduate and lawyer who served as vice-chair of the Alliance, represented herself during the proceedings and argued in court in May that the security legislation itself was on trial. In a statement published before the verdict, Chow addressed the judicial process.

justice lies in the hearts of the people, there is no need to revere judgments handed down from above, and a single verdict is of little consequence

Legal arguments and rights response

Prosecutors argued throughout the trial that the defendants used human rights advocacy as a pretext to endanger national security. The prosecution focused on the Alliance's core demand of ending one-party rule, asserting that speeches and public statements made over several decades were designed to incite the unlawful overthrow of Communist Party leadership. State attorneys told the court that freedoms of speech and association are not absolute rights under the law. Human rights organization Amnesty International criticized the prosecution, stating that the proceedings relied on vague and arbitrary definitions of subversion. Lee and Chow have remained in detention since their arrest in 2021.