Hong Kong court jails 45 democracy campaigners on subversion charges – Technologist

A Hong Kong court on Tuesday, November 19, jailed all 45 defendants convicted in the city’s largest trial under its sweeping national security law, with “mastermind” Benny Tai receiving the longest term of 10 years.

International condemnation was swift, with the United States, Australia and rights groups slamming the sentencing as evidence of the erosion of political freedoms in the city since Beijing imposed the security law in 2020. Tai’s jail term is the longest yet handed out under the law, which was brought in to quash dissent after massive, sometimes violent pro-democracy protests the year before.

The group, which included figures from across Hong Kong’s once-diverse political spectrum, was charged with subversion after they held an informal poll in 2020 as part of a strategy to win a pro-democracy electoral majority.

On Tuesday, the 45 were led into court and crammed into the defendant’s dock, from where they occasionally waved to the public gallery. Along with Tai, pro-democracy politicians Au Nok-hin, Andrew Chiu, Ben Chung and Australian citizen Gordon Ng were singled out as organizers and received sentences of up to seven years and three months.

Australia’s government said it was “gravely concerned” by the sentencing, and said it would continue to advocate for Ng’s “best interests.”

The other 40 defendants received terms beginning from four years and two months. After Tai, the second-longest sentence was handed to young activist Owen Chow, at seven years and nine months, with the court saying he “took a more proactive role in the scheme than other defendants”.

‘Refused to be tamed’

“Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung, the 68-year-old co-founder of the city’s last standing opposition party, the League of Social Democrats, received a term of six years and nine months. His wife and LSD leader Chan Po-ying told AFP outside the courtroom that the term was “within our expectations.” “It is what it is – no matter (whether) I laugh or I cry, so I choose to laugh a bit,” she said.

Leticia Wong, a former district councilor for a since-disbanded pro-democracy party who attended the sentencing, told AFP that she found the terms were “encouraging people to plead guilty and testify against their peers.” “For those who refused to be tamed, punishment is obviously heavier,” Wong said.

Western countries and international rights groups have condemned the trial as evidence of Hong Kong’s increased authoritarianism. A spokesperson for the US consulate in Hong Kong said Tuesday that the United States “strongly condemns” the sentencing, adding the defendants were “aggressively prosecuted and jailed for peacefully participating in normal political activity.”

“Today’s harsh sentences… reflect just how fast Hong Kong’s civil liberties and judicial independence have nosedived in the past four years,” Maya Wang, associate China director at Human Rights Watch, said in a statement.

Anna Kwok, executive director of the Washington-based Hong Kong Democracy Council, condemned the sentencing as “an attack on the essence of Hong Kong — one that yearns for freedom, democracy and the right to political expression.” China and Hong Kong have pushed back against criticism, saying the security law restored order following the 2019 protests, and warning against “interference” from other countries.

Forty-seven people were initially charged after they were arrested in January 2021, making this case the largest by number of defendants. Thirty-one pleaded guilty, and 16 stood a 118-day trial last year, with 14 convicted and two acquitted in May.

The aim of the election primary, which took place in July 2020, was to pick a cross-party shortlist of pro-democracy candidates to increase their electoral prospects. If a majority was achieved, the plan was to force the government to meet the 2019 protesters’ demands – including universal suffrage – by threatening to indiscriminately veto the budget. Three senior judges handpicked by the government to try security cases said the group would have caused a “constitutional crisis.”