A court convicted 14 pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong’s largest National Security Case. The court stated that their intent to affect change through an unofficial primary election erodes the government’s authority and subjects Hong Kong to a constitutional crisis.
Protest movements took place in Hong Kong in 2019, filling the streets with demonstrators.
Authorities then reduced public dissent by employing tactics like limiting public choice in elections, controlling social media, and imposing a security law in Beijing to convict the activists.
Current case from Hong Kong
The courts found former lawmakers Leung Kwok-hung, Lam Cheuk-ting, Helena Wong, and Raymond Chan guilty of conspiring to commit subversion. They could face up to a lifetime in prison when sentenced later.
These activists were among the 47 democracy advocates prosecuted in 2021 for their role in an unofficial primary election. Prosecutors accused them of attempting to hinder the Hong Kong government’s functions.
They also faced allegations of conspiring to topple the city’s leader by securing a legislative majority to veto budgets indiscriminately.
Summary of the verdict:
The court stated that the election participants declared their intention to use their legislative powers to veto budgets.
According to the city’s mini-constitution, the chief executive may dissolve the legislature if a budget cannot be passed. However, if the budget is vetoed again in the subsequent legislature, the leader would be required to resign.
The court declared that “the implementation of any new government policies would be seriously hampered and essentially put to a halt” if the plan to veto measures resulted in the legislature’s dissolution.
The court further stated that this event would greatly erode the power and authority of both the Government and the Chief Executive, putting Hong Kong in the face of a constitutional crisis.
Acquitted activists:
The court acquitted two activists, Lee and Lau.
Since Lau had not discussed vetoing the budget during his election campaign, the court was unable to determine that he had intended to usurp state power and thus ruled him not guilty.
The court exonerated Lee, like Lau, because it could not find any proof that he had discussed vetoing in an election forum or publicly stated his support for using the veto power to compel the government to comply with the demands of the 2019 protests.
Although Lee had joined the now-defunct Civic Party with a similar political platform to other members, the court considered that Lee joined the party late and would have had no choice but to follow the agenda of others. The court determined that he had not sought to undermine state authority with certainty.
The court will keep the two on bail pending appeal.
Reflections and Reactions:
The security law crushes the opposition, as demonstrated by this case of subversion. This was the major reason for the anti-government protests in 2019 as well.
But Beijing and Hong Kong governments insisted that the law has brought stability to the city. They also stated that the law safeguarded judicial independence.
Diplomats from countries like the USA, Australia, Britain, and many residents had come to witness the verdict. Rights groups and foreign governments criticized the court’s decision.
More about the unofficial Primary Elections in Hong Kong:
The unofficial primary election in June 2020 served to shortlist pro-democratic candidates who would later run in the official election. But it drew a very high voter turnout of almost 13% of Hong Kong’s registered electorate.
At the time, proponents of democracy planned to win a parliamentary majority so they could push for the demands of the 2019 protests, which included more accountability from the police and democratic elections for the Hong Kong leader.
