Hong Kong 47
Native name | 香港民主派初選案 |
---|---|
Date | 6 January 2021 | – 19 November 2024
Location | Hong Kong |
Target | Participants of 2020 Hong Kong pro-democracy primaries |
Arrests | 55 |
Suspects | 47 |
Charges | Conspiracy to commit subversion under the Hong Kong national security law |
Trial | HCCC69/2022 |
Verdict | 45 jailed (31 pleaded guilty, 14 found guilty) 2 acquitted |
Sentence | Imprisonment of 4 years 2 months to 10 years |
The Hong Kong 47 is a group of 47 pro-democracy advocates in Hong Kong charged with conspiracy to commit subversion under the Hong Kong national security law.[1]
On 6 January 2021, 53 activists, former legislators, social workers and academics were arrested by the National Security Department of the Hong Kong Police Force under the national security law over their organisation and participation in the primaries for the subsequently postponed Legislative Council election, including six organisers and 48 participants, of which two were arrested in jail, making it the largest crackdown under the national security law since its passage on 30 June 2020. Authorities also raided 72 sites including the home of jailed activist Joshua Wong, the offices of news outlets Apple Daily, Stand News and InMedia HK and polling institute Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute (PORI), and froze more than $200,000 in funds related to the primaries.[2] The arrests reduced the pro-democracy camp, including its moderate wing, considerably, and targeted several prominent figures.[3]
On 28 February 2021, 47 opposition figures among those arrested in January were officially charged with conspiracy to commit subversion under the national security law. Their appearance in court on 1 March saw hundreds of protesters assembling outside the building.[4]
Several defence lawyers expressed their objections in court to the slow prosecutions, which contrasted with speedily pressed charges.[4] Analysts considered the slow trial, which extended to other national security cases, to be a deliberate strategy designed to stoke fear.[5] The case was adjourned several times; at the adjournment on 4 March 2022, the next hearing date was set as 28 April, due to the COVID-19 pandemic,[6] at which date the defendants were told to appear again on 1 to 2 June; a higher court judge had called on the handling lower court a few days earlier to deliver a speedy trial.[7] The defendants were subjected at times to solitary confinement.[1]
The trial lasted from 6 February to 4 December 2023.[8][9] Two were acquitted by the panel of judges in May 2024, while the remaining 14 were found guilty. Along with 31 defendants who had entered a plea deal, the sentences of the 45 ranged from 4 years and 2 months to 10 years in prison. Benny Tai, whom the court described as the "mastermind" for initiating the plan, was handed the longest jail term.
Background
[edit]On 11 and 12 July 2020, the pro-democracy camp, organised by legal scholar and activist Benny Tai, held a primary to select numbers of candidates for the September Legislative Council election to maximise the chance for the pro-democrats to achieve the "35+" majority in the Legislative Council to block the government's bills and pressured the government to implement the five key demands of the ongoing protests.[10] Tai envisaged that the democrats would veto all bills in the legislature to paralyse the government, and would force the Chief Executive to dissolve the Legislative Council after the government budget was vetoed, as on the fourth and fifth stages of the "ten-step lam chau" timeline.[11] The resignation of the Chief Executive would be forced by Article 52 of the Basic Law if the Legislative Council resulting from a by-election still did not approve the budget.[12]
Before the primaries were held, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Erick Tsang warned that they might violate the new Beijing-imposed national security law, specifically its clauses prohibiting secession, subversion and collusion with foreign powers. Benny Tai refuted the claim by saying such advocacy work was in accordance with the principles of the Basic Law. He added that vetoing the budget would not constitute "seriously interfering in, disrupting, or undermining the performance of duties and functions" of the government under Article 22 of the new law because the chief executive has the power to dismiss the legislature and call a by-election.[13]
Despite the national security law and legal threats, over 600,000 voters, including 590,000 electronic ballots and more than 20,000 paper ballots, turned out throughout the two-day vote, more than 13 per cent of the total number of registered voters and far exceeding the organisers' expected turnout of 170,000.[14] Chief Executive Carrie Lam issued a strong warning to the candidates and organisers of the primaries, saying it was subversive for them to vow to seize control of the legislature and vote down key government proposals. "If this so-called primary election's purpose is to achieve the ultimate goal of delivering what they called '35+' [lawmakers], with the objective of objecting or resisting every policy initiative of the HKSAR government, it may fall into the category of subverting the state power – one of the four types of offences under the national security law," she said.[15]
A spokesman for Beijing's Liaison Office in Hong Kong condemned the opposition camp for ignoring the Hong Kong government's warning of possible legal breaches and pressing ahead with the primary. It named Benny Tai as a suspect in a possible breach of the national security law by coordinating with the opposition camp to seek control of the legislature, vote down the budget, paralyse the government and subvert the state power. It also accused Tai and the opposition of aiming to take over the city's governance by staging the Hong Kong version of a "colour revolution".[15] The Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office (HKMAO) accused Tai of "illegally manipulating" Hong Kong's electoral system, challenging the new national security law and acting as a political agent for foreign forces.[16]
Arrests
[edit]In the morning on 6 January 2021, the National Security Department of the Hong Kong Police Force raided 72 places, including the home of jailed activist Joshua Wong, as well as co-organisers Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute (PORI) and law firm Ho Tse Wai and Partners. It further demanded three news outlets Apple Daily, Stand News and InMedia HK to hand over information, and froze HK$206,000 in funds related to the election. In the operations, the police arrested 55 men and women[a] including activists, former legislators, social workers and academics who organised or contested in the primaries across the pro-democracy spectrum on suspicion of "subversion of state power" under the national security law.[17][18]
They included organiser Benny Tai and jailed activist and primary candidate Joshua Wong, seven former legislators of the Democratic Party, the Hong Kong's largest opposition party including the party chairman Wu Chi-wai, veteran politicians and activists Leung Kwok-hung and Claudia Mo, and newcomers including Jeffrey Andrews, a social worker serving the city's ethnic minority community, and disability rights advocate Lee Chi-yung.[19][20] American lawyer John Clancey, partner of Ho Tse Wai and Partners and treasurer of the Power for Democracy which co-ordinated the primaries, was also arrested.[21] PORI executive director Robert Chung and his deputy Chung Kim-wah were also visited by police and asked to assist with the investigation.[22]
On the afternoon after the arrests, Steve Li Kwai-wah, Senior Superintendent of the police national security unit, met with reporters. During the briefing, he showed a timetable showing that the proposal to use strategic voting to win a majority in the Legislative Council had first emerged in March 2020, with crowdfunding, public opinion research, publicity, and holding forums to follow until June. The primary elections were held on 11 and 12 July. Without referring to Benny Tai by name, he said that the proposer of the plan had been "very determined and resourceful". He stated that such aims as in the plan amounted to subversion.[23]
According to Secretary for Security John Lee, the arrestees were accused of "subverting state power" for holding the primaries and were suspected of attempting to gain a majority in the Legislative Council with the goal of paralysing the government. Lee also said that the primary election was organized and planned as an evidence for the "vicious plan" to "sink Hong Kong into an abyss."[24]
All arrestees are listed as the following.[25] All were released on bail on 7 January, except Wu Chi-wai, who was alleged to have violated bail conditions related to a separate case of unauthorized assembly.[26] On 28 February, 47 of those were arrested again, later charged.
List of arrestees
[edit]The 47 defendants charged with conspiracy to commit subversion under the national security law are:
Role | Portrait | Name | Arrest age | Offices held | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Organiser | Benny Tai Yiu-ting | 56 | Associate Law Professor of University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law (2001–2020) | Pleaded guilty | |
Au Nok-hin | 33 | Member of Legislative Council (2018–2020) | Pleaded guilty | ||
Andrew Chiu Ka-yin | 35 | Vice chairman of Eastern District Council Convenor of Power for Democracy | Pleaded guilty | ||
Ben Chung Kam-lun | 32 | Chairman of Sai Kung District Council Deputy convenor of Power for Democracy | Pleaded guilty | ||
John Clancey | 79 | Treasurer of Power for Democracy | Not charged | ||
Gordon Ng Ching-hang | 42 | Activist | Found guilty | ||
Candidates (Hong Kong Island) | Tiffany Yuen Ka-wai | 27 | Member of Southern District Council | Pleaded guilty | |
Fergus Leung Fong-wai | 23 | Member of Central and Western District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Tat Cheng Tat-hung | 32 | Member of Eastern District Council | Found guilty | ||
Andy Chui Chi-kin | 53–54 | Member of Eastern District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Clarisse Yeung Suet-ying | 34 | Chairman of Wan Chai District Council | Found guilty | ||
Michael Pang Cheuk-kei | 26 | Member of Southern District Council | Found guilty | ||
Candidates (Kowloon West) | Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit | 33 | Member of Sha Tin District Council Convenor of Civil Human Rights Front (2015–2016; 2018–2020) | Pleaded guilty | |
Claudia Mo Man-ching | 64 | Member of Legislative Council (2012–2020) | Pleaded guilty | ||
Kalvin Ho Kai-ming | 32 | Member of Sham Shui Po District Council Vice Chairman of Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood | Found guilty | ||
Frankie Fung Tat-chun | 25 | Convenor of Peninsular Commons | Pleaded guilty | ||
Lawrence Lau Wai-chung | 53 | Member of Sham Shui Po District Council Barrister and former magistrate | Acquitted | ||
Helena Wong Pik-wan | 61 | Member of Legislative Council (2012–2020) | Found guilty | ||
Nathan Lau Chak-fung | 24 | Activist | Pleaded guilty | ||
Alterin Jeffrey Andrews | 34–35 | Social worker | Not charged | ||
Candidates (Kowloon East) | Joshua Wong Chi-fung | 24 | Secretary general of Demosistō (2016–2020) | Pleaded guilty | |
Jeremy Jansen Tam Man-ho | 45 | Member of Legislative Council (2016–2020) | Pleaded guilty | ||
Kinda Li Ka-tat | 29–30 | Member of Kwun Tong District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Tam Tak-chi | 48 | Vice chairman of People Power | Pleaded guilty | ||
Wu Chi-wai | 58 | Member of Legislative Council (2012–2020) Chairman of Democratic Party (2016–2020) | Pleaded guilty | ||
Sze Tak-loy | 38 | Member of Wong Tai Sin District Council Chairman of Hong Kong Association for Democracy and People's Livelihood | Found guilty | ||
Candidates (New Territories West) | Eddie Chu Hoi-dick | 43 | Member of Legislative Council (2016–2020) | Pleaded guilty | |
Sam Cheung Ho-sum | 27 | Member of Tuen Mun District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Prince Wong Ji-yuet | 23 | Spokesperson of Scholarism (2015–2016) | Pleaded guilty | ||
Ng Kin-wai | 25 | Member of Yuen Long District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Andrew Wan Siu-kin | 51 | Member of Legislative Council (2016–2020) Member of Kwai Tsing District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Kwok Ka-ki | 59 | Member of Legislative Council (2004–2008; 2012–2020) | Pleaded guilty | ||
Carol Ng Man-yee | 50 | Chairwoman of Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions | Pleaded guilty | ||
Roy Tam Hoi-pong | 40 | Member of Tsuen Wan District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Candidates (New Territories East) | Gwyneth Ho Kwai-lam | 30 | Former journalist for Stand News | Found guilty | |
Ventus Lau Wing-hong | 27 | Activist | Pleaded guilty | ||
Alvin Yeung Ngok-kiu | 39 | Member of Legislative Council (2016–2020) Leader of the Civic Party (2016–2020) | Pleaded guilty | ||
Raymond Chan Chi-chuen | 48 | Member of Legislative Council (2012–2020) Chairman of People Power | Found guilty | ||
Owen Chow Ka-shing | 24 | Activist | Found guilty | ||
Lam Cheuk-ting | 43 | Member of Legislative Council (2016–2020) Member of North District Council | Found guilty | ||
Gary Fan Kwok-wai | 54 | Member of Legislative Council (2012–2016; 2018–2020) Member of Sai Kung District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Hendrick Lui Chi-hang | 37–38 | Social worker | Pleaded guilty | ||
Leung Kwok-hung | 64 | Member of Legislative Council (2004–2017) | Found guilty | ||
Mike Lam King-nam | 32 | Founder of retail chain AbouThai | Pleaded guilty | ||
Ricky Or Yiu-lam | 49 | Member of Sai Kung District Council | Found guilty | ||
Lee Chi-yung | 40–41 | Spokesman for Association of Parents of the Severely Mentally Handicapped | Not charged | ||
Candidates (District Council (Second)) | Roy Kwong Chun-yu | 38 | Member of Legislative Council (2016–2020) Member of Yuen Long District Council | Not charged | |
Lester Shum Ngo-fai | 27 | Member of Tsuen Wan District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
Henry Wong Pak-yu | 30 | Member of Yuen Long District Council | Pleaded guilty | ||
James To Kun-sun | 57 | Member of Legislative Council (1998–2020) Member of Yau Tsim Mong District Council | Not charged | ||
Lee Yue-shun | 27 | Member of Eastern District Council | Acquitted | ||
Candidates (Health Services) | Winnie Yu Wai-ming | 33 | Chairperson of Hospital Authority Employees Alliance | Found guilty | |
Michael Felix Lau Hoi-man | 36–37 | Officer of Hong Kong Allied Health Professionals and Nurse Association | Not charged | ||
Joseph Lee Kok-long | 61 | Member of Legislative Council (2004–2020) | Not charged | ||
Yuen Wai-kit | 42–43 | Principal of the School of Nursing of the Union Hospital | Not charged |
Responses
[edit]Hong Kong
[edit]Hong Kong government
[edit]On the day of the arrests, Secretary for Security John Lee said at the Legislative Council that the ten-step lam chau timeline that Benny Tai, one of the arrestees, had proposed would "result in serious damage to society as a whole, that is why police action today is necessary."[24]
The government issued a press release stating that the arrested persons are "active elements who organize, plan, implement, or participate in the subversion of the regime" with the intent to paralyze the government, severely interfere with, obstruct, and undermine the performance of its functions, and coerce the Chinese government and the SAR government.[27]
Ronny Tong, a member of the Executive Council, said that for the time being, he did not see that the democrats violated the national security law in the primary elections. However, he also pointed out that members' veto of all government funding to prevent the government from functioning may be "seriously interfering with the performance of government agencies' duties," and that they may violate the law.[28]
Pro-Beijing camp
[edit]Holden Chow, member of the Legislative Council for the largest pro-Beijing party, DAB, said in a tweet that those arrested had violated the national security law because they had a "clear aim to paralyze" the local government and were threatening to "remove the Chinese sovereignty over Hong Kong."[29]
In an interview with the public broadcaster RTHK, Roundtable lawmaker Michael Tien said the authorities should explain what unlawful means were involved in the cases, saying that "on the surface", neither holding a primary election nor casting a vote was unlawful. He further said that he saw no way of how the arrestees could be convicted without the court interpreting the "ultimate motive as part of the [national security] bill", and opined that the national security law might need to be redrafted to more clearly reflect this interpretation.[30]
Pro-democracy camp
[edit]Democratic Party chairman Lo Kin-hei sharply criticised the arrests at a news conference, suggesting that the national security law was poised to become a "universal key" for the government which would lead to "white terror", adding that this was "exactly what the Hong Kong government wants to create".[31]
Civic Party chairman Alan Leong criticised the mass arrests as he could not see why those who promised to exercise their power to veto budgets – as outlined in the Basic Law – would be considered subversive. "We know that many in Hong Kong are very disappointed. But we appeal to the people of Hong Kong not to despair," Leong said. "We should insist on speaking the truth and living in truth. There will be light in the end of the dark tunnel, and every dark night will see the dawn. So, let us stand and fight."[32]
Three candidates for the pro-democracy primaries in exile, Nathan Law, Ted Hui, and Sunny Cheung issued a statement in the evening of 6 January, describing the mass arrest as another proof that the one country, two systems principle was lost under the authority of the Chinese Communist Party, and saw the wide spectrum of those arrested, covering almost the complete democratic camp, as clear indication that the goal of the action was to uproot it in its entirety.[33]
Mainland China
[edit]The Office for Safeguarding National Security and the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government both issued statements of firm support for the enforcement actions and singled out Benny Tai, with the liaison office spokesperson saying, "[We] believe that the general public can clearly see the evil intentions of Benny Tai and others, and the harm caused to Hong Kong society."[34]
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying defended the arrests, saying that they were needed to stop "external forces and individuals [colluding] to undermine China's stability and security".[35]
Before the trial, director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office Xia Baolong singled out three pro-democracy activists charged with the national security law, Joshua Wong, Jimmy Lai and Benny Tai, saying they were "extremely wicked" and "must be severely punished for their illegal actions."[36] Hong Kong Free Press enquired with the Department of Justice about the department's position on the remarks of Xia, given its statements that comments from third parties on ongoing court proceedings were inappropriate. The department pointed to the words "in accordance with the law" which Xia had added; it refused to elaborate on the significance of this comment in this context, and on the question of whether anyone else would be able to legally use the formulation of Xia.[37]
In June 2024, the Ministry of State Security called the case a "major test" of national security and the rule of law, and said that the verdict in the trial of the 16 defendants who had pleaded guilty, 14 of whom had been convicted, was a deterrent to "anti-China forces and foreign forces".[38]
Taiwan
[edit]President of the Republic of China Tsai Ing-wen condemned the arrests and called on "the world's democracies to speak out against China's political repression in the territory." She vowed that Taiwan will "continue to resolutely support a free Hong Kong and stand up for our shared democratic values." Taiwan's Foreign Minister Joseph Wu described the arrests in Hong Kong as a "deep shock to those who treasure freedom" and called on the world to "unite against authoritarianism."[39]
United States
[edit]U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the 53 arrested on 6 January "should be released immediately and unconditionally", calling the arrest an "assault on the Hong Kong people", and said that the U.S. would consider sanctions.[40] Antony Blinken, US President-elect Joe Biden's pick for Secretary of State, said the arrests were "an assault on those bravely advocating for universal rights" launched by the Chinese authorities. "The Biden-Harris administration will stand with the people of Hong Kong and against Beijing's crackdown on democracy," he said.[19]
The U.S. imposed sanctions on six officials on 15 January including Hong Kong delegate to the National People's Congress Standing Committee Tam Yiu-chung, vice-chairman of the Central Leading Group on Hong Kong and Macau Affairs You Quan, deputy director of the Office for Safeguarding National Security Sun Wenqing and three officials in the National Security Division of the Hong Kong Police Frederic Choi Chin-pang, Kelvin Kong Hok-lai and Andrew Kan Kai-yan, over the mass arrests.[41]
United Kingdom
[edit]British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab called the arrests "a grievous attack on Hong Kong's rights and freedoms as protected under the Joint Declaration" and reiterated the UK's offer to the British National (Overseas) passport holders to emigrate to Britain.[42] "The UK will not turn our backs on the people of Hong Kong and will continue to offer BNOs the right to live and work in the UK," Raab said.[19]
The last British Governor of Hong Kong Chris Patten urged the European Union not to go ahead with the draft investment deal with China. "If this deal goes ahead it will make a mockery of Europe's ambitions to be taken seriously as a global political and economic player. It spits in the face of human rights and shows a delusional view of the Chinese Communist Party's trustworthiness on the international stage."[42]
European Union
[edit]The European Union called for the immediate release of the arrestees. "We are currently analysing the situation to see how we might need to react. There are other possibilities open to us, sanctions for example," the European Commission spokesperson Peter Stano said.[42] The German Foreign Ministry called the arrests "another milestone in a worrying development in recent months." The arrests confirmed fears that the security law "is leading to an erosion of civil liberties and the rule of law".[19]
The European Parliament on 21 January adopted a resolution by 597 votes in favor, 17 against and 61 abstentions on the deteriorating human rights situation in Hong Kong and urged EU countries to consider introducing sanctions against Hong Kong and Chinese officials including Carrie Lam, under the EU Human Rights Global Sanction Regime. The Parliament also regretted the EU's decision to enter the EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment by risking its credibility as a global human rights actor.[43]
Japan
[edit]The government of Japan stated that it could not tolerate the mass arrests in Hong Kong, and would convey this position to China and join hands with foreign countries to deal with the Hong Kong issue. It continued to point out that after the implementation of the national security law, it had deep doubts about whether Hong Kong respects basic values such as freedom of speech and freedom of the press.[44] Ruling party LDP lawmaker Keisuke Suzuki said that the current situation in Hong Kong was serious and it was at a critical juncture. He emphasized that the international community must regard the actions of the Hong Kong government as a violation of international agreements. He also describes the nature of the Chinese Communist Party is to deny universal values such as freedom, democracy and human rights.[45]
Others
[edit]Maya Wang of Human Rights Watch issued a statement condemning the arrests, saying that "Beijing once again has failed to learn from its mistakes in Hong Kong: that repression generates resistance, and that millions of Hong Kong people will persist in their struggle for their right to vote and run for office in a democratically elected government."[46]
Bail hearings
[edit]On 28 February 2021, of the 55 pro-democracy figures initially arrested in January, 47 were officially charged with conspiracy to commit subversion under the national security law. They were denied bail and instead remained in detention before trial on 1 March, while Jeffrey Andrews, Lee Chi-yung, Kwong Chun-yu, James To, Michael Lau, Joseph Lee, Yuen Wai-kit and John Clancey were released on bail.[47][48][49] Pro-democracy group Power for Democracy which co-organised the primaries announced its disbandment a day earlier on 27 February.[50]
As of 8 March 2022, only 13 of 47 defendants had been granted bail, a reflection of the stringent requirements for bail under the national security law.[51] By early July 2021, many of the defendants had announced their retirement from politics.[52]
Marathon hearing
[edit]Day 1
[edit]The trial began on 1 March at the West Kowloon Magistrates' Court. About 1,000 supporters gathered at the court, most wearing black to express solidarity with the detainees, and some holding banners calling for the release of the "political prisoners" and chanting "Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times", "Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong" and "Five demands, not one less ", slogans which were deemed illegal under the national security law, making it one of the largest rallies since the COVID-19 outbreak. Foreign diplomats joined the crowds queuing for one of the about 100 seats inside the courtroom. The police set up security lines around the court in the afternoon and forced demonstrators to disperse.[53]
The prosecution applied to postpone the hearing until 31 May as its investigations had not finished. Alan Leong, representing the defence, questioned the police for "rushing" to press charges without finishing the investigations, some five weeks earlier than originally scheduled. Traditionally, Hong Kong's common law system put the onus on the prosecution to prove its case for objecting bail, but under the national security law the defendants instead needed to prove to the court that they would not be a national security threat if released on bail.[54] Due to the large number of defendants being trialed at the same time, the proceedings dragged on for close to 14 hours until almost 3 a.m., resulting in four defendants being hospitalised due to exhaustion. Leo Yau, one of the defence solicitors for nine of the defendants, was arrested by the police when he attempted to pass a police cordon to get into the courtroom.[55]
- Pro-Beijing group rally outside court
- Police showed banners warning the public of violating the security law.
- Leo Yau, a defence lawyer, was arrested by the police for trying to cross police cordon.
Day 2
[edit]The second day of the trial resumed late on the next morning, giving defendants little time to rest.[55] Defense lawyers voiced criticism of the court over defendants not being given the opportunity to shower or change clothes for four days since they were detained on 28 February.[56][57] One of the defendants, Lawrence Lau, 53, also a practicing barrister, apologized for not bathing for three days before addressing the court. He added: "When someone is stripped of their freedom, they are also stripped of their personal hygiene and appearance, which makes them lose confidence. I do not understand why I ended up in custody when I have been law-abiding my whole life." A defence counsel also told the court that his defendants had not been sent back to the Lai Chi Kok Reception Centre until nearly 7 a.m. on 2 March. "The defendants have to attend court hearings that started at 8 this morning [yesterday], which means they could only rest for at most two hours, causing them to be physically tormented," he said.[58] Amnesty International Hong Kong program manager Lam Cho Ming warned that an extended hearing "along with insufficient time to rest could potentially violate the right to a fair trial."[59] Chief magistrate Victor So called a halt to the second day of hearings at 10:36 p.m. on 2 March.[58]
Another defendant, Winnie Yu, 33, a nurse and chairwoman of the Hospital Authority Employees Alliance, was suspended from her duties by the Hong Kong Hospital Authority after she was prosecuted.[58]
Day 3
[edit]Eight defendants had not addressed the court regarding their bail applications in the more than 24-hour marathon hearing. On the third day on 3 March 47 pro-democracy defendants have yet to submit their statements on bail. Before the trial started at 12 pm, the live broadcast system showed the problem of not being able to hear the conversation or voice in the court again, causing the family members to question the "secret interrogation." On the other hand, the live broadcasts in the press room and the auditorium both had problems with pictures and no sound, which caused the reporters on the spot to clamor. Barrister Margaret Ng said that the court has no way to control its own procedures, as she questioned the judicial independence. However, Kit Hung, the senior news director of the Judiciary, stated that no in-court voices will be played before the court session. This statement caused dissatisfaction with Figo Chan, the convener of Civil Human Rights Front.[60]
At the same time, four Civic Party defendants Alvin Yeung, Kwok Ka-ki, Jeremy Tam and Lee Yue-shun announced their resignations from the party, with Yeung resigning from the party. Barrister Alan Leong, chairman of the party, terminated his legal representation of the four.[61] Lam Cheuk-ting, Clarisse Yeung and Gwyneth Ho also told the court they had terminated the services of their legal representatives. Alvin Yeung said before addressing the court: "As a barrister, I would never have imagined that I would have to address the court in the docks. On March 2 five years ago, I was sworn in as a legislative councillor, fighting for Hongkongers, but five years later, I am fighting for my own freedom."[62] Chief Magistrate Victor So adjourned the third day proceedings at 8:30 pm.[59]
Day 4
[edit]All defendants finished their addresses to the court with proceedings deep into the fourth day on 4 March. Hundreds of people queued in the rain for entering the courthouse before the proceedings until nighttime, defying police warnings of violating the national security law.[54]
Some media outlets applied to the court for lifting reporting strict restrictions on the bail proceedings which could only report the name of the court and the magistrate of the case, the date and place of the proceedings, the name of the defendants and their legal representation, the offence they were charged of and the result of a proceedings.[63] The defence proposed a set of relaxed reporting rules, with Barrister David Ma saying that an open, fair and transparent trial was the "cornerstone of the rule of law", pointing out that freedom of speech and the press are respected under the national security law.[63] A representative of Senior Counsel Hectar Pun argued that "if the media cannot report on this open hearing, then it will undermine the principle of open justice."[63] Chief Magistrate Victor So refused the plea on the grounds that the general public or the press may not be able to determine whether a statement made in court fell under the scope of "legal argument," causing citizens to accidentally breach the restrictions, which would be "a bit dangerous for them".[63]
Chief Magistrate Victor So initially granted bail to 15 of the 47 defendants at around 8 pm, but the decision was immediately appealed by the Department of Justice. The 32 remaining defendants were denied bail on grounds that they would be likely to continue to commit acts endangering national security, meaning they would have to be remain in detention until the trial begins on 31 May.[59] When the defendants left the court, the supporters who waited outside waved goodbye and thanked their lawyers. Some also chanted "Five demands, not one less", "Political prisoners are not guilty" and "Hongkonger won't die."[64]
Other hearings
[edit]The hearings on the case resumed on 31 May 2021. The court postponed further proceedings until 8 July. Until 28 June, defendants in the case will be presented with evidence and allowed to enter a plea, otherwise, their case will be moved to the High Court, where some analysts say, could consider harsher sentences than lower courts.[65][66]
The hearings were further delayed for several times without clear trial date by judges following a request by prosecution, which had asked for more time to prepare the case.[52][67][68][6][7] The prosecution sought to transfer it to a higher court with powers to order longer jail sentences.[69] A High Court judge, in April 2022, called for a speedy trial in the lower court, and also revealed that 11 defendants intended to plead guilty when the case was officially committed to the High Court.[70]
On 1 June, Chief Magistrate Peter Law in the West Kowloon Court ruled that 17 defendants will be transferred to the High Court for trial.[71] A further 27 defendants were committed to the High Court on 2 June.[72] Two more were transferred on 6 June,[72] and the final defendant, Gordon Ng, who requested for a committal proceedings, was transferred on 6 July.[73]
Bail appeals
[edit]Amongst the 47 defendants, bail of 15 were appealed by the prosecution. By 15 March, judge Victor So ruled in favour of the prosecution over four (Jeremy Tam, Sam Cheung, Ng Kin-wai, Kwok Ka-ki), seven were bailed out by the court, while Clarisse Yeung, Lawrence Lau, Hendrick Lui and Mike Lam were also released on bail after prosecutors dropped the appeal.[74]
Of the 21 defendants presented to the courts on the next day on 12 March, Judge Victor So, who was the magistrate who granted the appeals in the first place, rejected 11 appeal applications on 12 March, while the ten remaining defendants withdrew their applications.[75] Other bail appeals were mainly handled by High Court judge Esther Toh.
Bailed out (13)
[edit]- Helena Wong: approved on 11 March;[76] Wong, after release, reunited with her husband and said: "I was really calm while I was in custody, as I know I did nothing wrong, but the bail hearing was really tiring in the first few days."[77]
- Clarisse Yeung: approved on 12 March after appeal dropped by prosecution.[74]
- Mike Lam: approved on 12 March after appeal dropped by prosecution.[74]
- Lawrence Lau: approved on 12 March after appeal dropped by prosecution.[74]
- Hendrick Lui: approved on 12 March after appeal dropped by prosecution.[74]
- Tat Cheng: approved on 13 March.[78]
- Michael Pang: approved on 13 March.[78]
- Ricky Or: approved on 13 March.[78]
- Kalvin Ho: approved on 14 March.[79]
- Sze Tak-loy: approved on 14 March,[79] for serving the community as district councillors and cooperating with various government departments.[80]
- Lee Yue-shun: approved on 14 March,[79] for serving the community as district councillors and cooperating with various government departments.[80]
- Raymond Chan: approved on 16 September,[81] for cooperating with the government as MP by supporting some government bills, and having been named by LegCo president Andrew Leung as the most diligent lawmaker.[82][83]
- Wong Ji-yuet: approved on 21 December,[84] to finish her bachelor's degree, and she had not explicitly advocated for international sanctions against the authorities, and for Hong Kong independence, during the primaries.[85]
Remanded (34)
[edit]- Ng Kin-wai: denied on 11 March 2021;[76] denied on 6 June 2022,[86] for clear determination to promote Hong Kong independence.[87]
- Jeremy Tam: denied on 13 March;[78] denied on 22 April for signing a letter in September 2019 supporting the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.[88]
- Sam Cheung: denied on 14 March;[79] denied on 9 April for "determined and resolute" in his contribution to the democrats' scheme.[89]
- Leung Kwok-hung: denied on 29 March;[90] denied on 13 May for resolute in his position against the government and the national security law and that his risk of reoffending was high due to international support.[91][92]
- Ben Chung: denied on 31 March for seeking of crowdfunding, alleged to be part of a money laundering scheme, and his pivotal role in the defunct organization Power for Democracy;[93] denied on 1 June.[94]
- Kwok Ka-ki: denied on 13 March;[78] denied on 9 April for inviting U.S. interference on Hong Kong affairs.[89]
- Jimmy Sham: denied on 12 April;[95] denied on 13 May for being a "determined and resolute young man" who had vowed to continue to push for the government to give in to the protesters five demands and that he was at risk of reoffending if granted bail.[91][92]
- Claudia Mo: denied on 14 April;[96] denied on 28 May for her exchanges on WhatsApp with Western media were a "threat to national security".[97]
- Chui Chi-kin: denied on 22 April for causing fear and inciting hatred against the government by uploading a video on his YouTube channel which appeared to show a large contingent of People's Liberation Army military vehicles crossing into Hong Kong from mainland China.[98]
- Andrew Wan: denied on 28 May citing the contents on his computer that advocated for Hong Kong independence, and the formation of a group which called for international sanctions against Hong Kong officials who allegedly permitted "excessive police violence".[99] This, the court argued, demonstrated a "persistent and strong devotion" to the agenda of subversion and secession.[100]
- Henry Wong: denied on 1 June;[94] denied on 1 September[101] for his active participation of international front, which is calling for sanctions against Hong Kong and Chinese government officials.[102]
- Gary Fan: denied on 1 June;[94] denied on 8 September,[103] for being a "determined and resolute man" who had vowed to continue to push for the authorities to give in to the protesters' five demands and he had called for all parties to act together in opposing the government.[82][83]
- Gordon Ng: denied on 1 June;[94] denied on 14 September 2022.[104]
- Andrew Chiu: denied on 1 June.[94]
- Nathan Lau: denied on 1 June.[94]
- Roy Tam: denied on 23 August,[105] citing on the election campaign speech of his stance against the Hong Kong government, police and the national security law. In addition, he is also calling for international sanctions against Hong Kong officials and senior police officers on his Facebook page, although he removed his account after promulgation of national security law.[106][107]
- Gwyneth Ho: withdrew bail application on 8 September after request to lift reporting restrictions was rejected by Toh. Ho was represented by Douglas Kwok after the original representing barrister Chow Hang-tung was arrested that day.[108][109]
- Frankie Fung: denied on 4 November,[110] for showing himself to be persistent in promoting and spreading subversive ideologies due to his media outlet that he co-funded, which is serving as a platform to promote seditious ideologies and calling for international sanctions against Hong Kong and Chinese officials.[111]
- Carol Ng: denied on 20 December,[112] for having an international influence as a result of her trade union work and having called for resistance against the authorities after losing the primary election and shown determination to resist against the government.[113]
- Lam Cheuk-ting: denied on 13 May 2022,[114] for using his Patreon account to enhance international lobbying and resistance against the government and having a strong political influence due to his stance on lobby for sanctions.[115]
Special cases
[edit]- Wu Chi-wai: emergency application approved on 7 May to attend the funeral of his 92-year-old father after the denial of his initial request by the correctional department sparked wide criticism.[116] Remanded in custody before and after the temporary bail.
- Owen Chow: approved on 22 June to enable Chow to finish his nursing degree, and he had not explicitly called for Hong Kong independence during the primaries;[117] re-arrested on 12 January 2022 and bail revoked following a court ruling that he had broken his bail conditions and endangered national security through online postings of an inciteful nature which related to the 2019 Prince Edward station attack and the 2019 Yuen Long attack.[118][119]
- Winnie Yu: denied on 1 June;[94] approved on 28 July after observing in her written explanation that there was no evidence that Yu ever had an international connection;[120][121] re-arrested on 7 March and bail revoked for breaking bail conditions.[122][123]
Pre-trial events
[edit]As per an order signed by Secretary for Justice, Paul Lam, dated 13 August 2022, the case was to be handled without a jury due to the "involvement of foreign elements", "personal safety of jurors and their family members", and a "risk of perverting the course of justice if the trial is conducted with a jury".[124]
On 18 August 2022, authorities in Hong Kong said that 29 defendants had entered guilty pleas in court; the pleas had been entered earlier but the announcement was only made on that day, after reporting restrictions had been lifted.[125] In November, Ng Kin-wai changed his mind and indicated that he also would plead guilty.[126] On 11 January 2023, a panel of three judges ruled that those who had pleaded guilty would be sentenced only after the trial of the 17 who had pleaded not guilty.[127] On 17 January, Mike Lam indicated through his lawyer that he would plead guilty.[128]
Trial
[edit]HKSAR v NG Ching-hang & Ors HKSAR v Tai Yiu Ting & Ors | |
---|---|
Court | High Court of Hong Kong |
Decided | 19 November 2024 |
Citation | HCCC69/2022, HCCC70/2022 |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Andrew Chan, Alex Lee Wan-tang, Johnny Chan Jong-herng |
When the trial began on 6 February 2023, nearly two years after the arrest, it was expected to run for 90 days. Those who have pleaded guilty will not be sentenced until after the trial.[129]
League of Social Democrats, one of the last active pro-democracy groups, organised a small protest under a heavy police presence, decrying the crackdown as "shameless" and calling for the release of all political prisoners. Representatives from eleven countries including the UK and the US, along with the European Union were also among those queueing up.
The trial opened with the court reading out the charge and formally taking pleas from 18 defendants in front of three national security judges – Andrew Chan, Johnny Chan and Alex Lee. All 18 repeated that they would plead not guilty except Ng Kin-wai and Mike Lam, both changed their mind earlier.[130]
The key issue of this case is whether the defendants reached an agreement to indiscriminately veto the budget in order to force the dissolution of Legislative Council and the resignation of Chief Executive, which amounts to "subversion".[131]
Prosecutors told the West Kowloon Magistrates Court that the accused had conspired to seriously interfere, disrupt or undermine the duties and functions of the Hong Kong government, "with a view to subverting the state power". An amended filing revealed the prosecution had dropped one accusation that the group intended to use "the threat of force", a change noted in court by Gwyneth Ho, one of the defendants. Leung Kwok-hung, on the other hand, said in court that there was "no crime to admit" and that "it is not a crime to act against a totalitarian regime".[126]
Prosecutor Anthony Chau said that if the elections were not delayed due to COVID-19, the alleged conspiracy would have been "carried out to fruition."[132]
As the trial was underway, a suspected projectile shattered a window at the West Kowloon Law Courts Building in February.[133] Secretary for Justice Paul Lam condemned "any violent acts intended to disrupt or damage the due administration of justice".[134] Protective screens were installed along a flyover next to the courthouse in late March.[135]
The trial ended on 4 December 2023.[9]
Trial timeline
[edit]Procedures | Days | |
---|---|---|
Prosecution case | 58 | |
Opening submission | 5 | |
Witness (Au) | 24 | |
Witness (Chiu) | 17 | |
Witness (Chung) | 3 | |
Witness (Lam) | 1 | |
Witness (Mr. X) | 1 | |
Application of co-conspirator rule | 4 | |
Half-time submission | 2 | |
Defence case | 50 | |
Tat Cheng | 7 | |
Michael Pang | 4 | |
Kalvin Ho | 4 | |
Lawrence Lau | 2 | |
Sze Tak-loy | 4 | |
Gwyneth Ho | 10 | |
Raymond Chan | 3 | |
Owen Chow | 6 | |
Ricky Or | 3 | |
Lee Yue-shun | 4 | |
Winnie Yu | 4 |
Witnesses for prosecution
[edit]The court also heard that four people who are to plead guilty, Au Nok-hin, Andrew Chiu, Ben Chung, Mike Lam, will give evidence as witnesses for the prosecution. Au, Chiu, and Chung each testified for 24, 17, and 3 days.
Timeline of primaries
[edit]Au started testifying against fellow democrats on the 6th day of trial, revealed that the plan for the primaries was first floated in January 2020,[136] in a meeting joined by him, Tai, Lee Wing-tat (Democratic), Lee Cheuk-yan (Labour), and Wong Ho-ming (LSD). In a meeting, Tai labelled a majority in the Legislative Council as a "constitutional weapon of mass destruction" to force the resignation of the Chief Executive by vetoing the budget. He also considered establishing "a mechanism for citizens to participate", preferably through a referendum, to achieve the five demands in the protest movement. Au claimed he became an organiser after Lee's invitation, likely because he was once the leader of the pro-democracy coalition CHRF, wishing to contribute to the democratic movement.[137] He said he was mainly responsible for administrative jobs including liaising and holding an election forum, while Tai handled the narrative works and Chiu was assisting the plan.[138]
Au and Tai then met various democrats and in February and March in a series of briefings on the primaries plan. Parties were divided on the idea of vetoing the budget, while others did not express much interest in running in the unofficial election. Joshua Wong, according to Au, even urged him no need to be involved as he was about to study abroad.[139]
According to Andrew Chiu, PfD was invited to advise on the primaries because of previous experience in organising primaries for legislative by-elections,[140] later invited reluctantly by Tai to host the polls after pollster HKPORI declined.[141] The recollection of PfD's involvement in the primaries differs between the other two witnesses. Chiu claimed the group officially accepted the invitation in May as he hoped the PfD would not be marginalised,[141] but Ben Chung told the court that a meeting in February between Chiu, Chung, Tai, and ex-MP Fung Chi-wood had reached a consensus which PfD would co-ordinate and crowdfund the primaries.[137]
Between March and July 2020, at least 16 coordination meetings for six constituencies (Kowloon East, Kowloon West, New Territories East, New Territories West, Hong Kong Island, District Council (Second)) were held, invited by Tai and joined by pro-democracy parties along with those interested to run in the upcoming general election. These meetings agreed to the holding of primaries and an election forum, settled on the target number of seats, and confirmed the leapfrog mechanism for disqualified candidates.[137]
Au said in court that Tai introduced the concept of vetoing the budget in the coordination meetings. The "35+ Plan" (Chinese: 35+計劃) document prepared by Tai, without references to the veto power, was discussed starting in April. A "coordination agreement" file was then drafted by Tai, including the wording of "to actively use the power of Basic Law including vetoing the financial budget",[137] described by Au as an "invention" by Tai to balance both sides.[138] The notion to defeat the budget was contested during these meetings, as multiple participants were skeptical,[139] but Tai sided with the localists as mentioned by Chiu.[140] In New Territories East meeting, traditional democrats were criticised by localist Owen Chow for being skeptical. Eventually the agreement document for the New Territories East and West constituency adopted the wording of "to use" the veto power, while the other continued with "to actively use".[137] Chiu believed this was a result of localist's pressure on the traditional democrats as the former back then was "very progressive".[142]
Au said Tai announced "agreements had finally been reached" on the coordination of the six constituencies on 3 June. Replying to judge's question, Au believed it is fair to say consensuses between participants through the "coordination agreements".[143] Chiu and Chung echoed Au, agreeing all coordination were completed by 9 June, the date for the press conference announcing the primaries, as the final version of the agreements were considered by Tai as the "consensuses" between candidates. Chiu added that such consensuses do not include actions after elected to the Legislative Council.[144] These documents, however, were not publicised as organisers were concerned of potential disqualification by the authorities and the rumoured implementation of the national security law after Au and Chiu convinced Tai.[142] Despite so, 37 localists and parties from the "resistance camp" signed an agreement (Chinese: 墨落無悔; lit. 'No Regret Upon Inked') vowing to veto the budget, which Chiu said was because of distrust between the two wings in the democracy movement.[142] Kowloon East and New Territories West candidates submitted an additional, voluntary (disputed by Sze Tak-loy's attorney)[144] "consensual principles" (Chinese: 共同綱領) document attached with nomination forms which was similar to the "coordination agreement". Chiu testified in court that Tai mentioned Joshua Wong and Eddie Chu advocated the submission, while some localists forced others to follow suit.[137] Au admitted the organisers had already lost the authority to stop the localists, and revealed that Wu Chi-wai, chairman of Democratic Party, refrained from signing that document despite eventually giving in to pressure. But he agreed no candidates were publicly opposed to using the veto power.[143]
During an election forum between 25 June and 4 July, the national security law was inserted into Hong Kong's legal system on 30 June. Tai texted candidates and said he believed the veto manifesto does not violate the new law and the primaries would go ahead.
On 3 July Apple Daily published a front-page advertisement by Gordon Ng, deemed by the prosecutors as one of the organisers, urging to support the primaries.[137] Au said he does not know Ng, and had no idea he was one of the organisers.[143] Chiu shared Au's view but thinks his "Say No to Primary Dodgers" campaign gives an impression of organising a party. Chiu, during testimony, said Tai once confirmed the campaign was not directly linked to the primaries, and claimed he was personally concerned Ng's petition might violate election laws.[141]
Erick Tsang became the first official warning the unofficial poll could be in breach of the national security law on 9 July, two days before the start of the voting. After the end of the poll on 13 July, Chinese officials in Hong Kong condemned the "illegal" election. On the next day, Tai told candidates to avoid mentioning "paralysing the government". Au understood this as an act to avoid legal risk;[143] Chiu said this showed Tai likely knew he crossed the line because he first said the legality as he understood was simply based on common law system but not Chinese continental law.[142] The strong condemnation prompted Au, who claimed "doing his best to dismantle the primaries" and quit only because of its legality,[145] Chiu, and Tai, to quit on 15 and 16 July. Chiu, in court, further remarked the primaries were "out of control" after the victorious resistance camp convened a press conference and promised mutual destruction after being elected to parliament.[137]
Following the government's decision to postpone the election citing the emergency law, PfD continued to finish the follow-up administrative works. Chiu said he had met Tai later that year, when Tai believed the worst was already over without giving up hope on vetoing the budget.[137] Under the initial plan, the PfD would ask the HKPORI to commission an opinion poll on strategic voting, with results released a week before the general election.[142] Another opinion poll would also be commissioned for the proposed veto manifesto, an idea from Tai after the election postponement to exert pressure on the traditional moderates.[144]
The democrats were charged and detained after February 2021. Chiu confirmed in court that he had been helping the police's investigation by June 2021,[141] while Au did so three months later.[139]
Ideologies
[edit]In addition to recall the history of timelines, Au and Chiu, in addition, elaborated their interpretation and views on "lam chau" doctrine and "resistance camp".
Au said a considerable size of participants believed forcing the Chief Executive to stand down through voting down the budget involved a degree of "lam chau" idea. Au described the "resistance camp" is in the "progressive" wing of the pro-democracy spectrum, naming Winnie Yu as a member of the camp, Owen Chow as "localist", and Gwyneth Ho with some "left-wing ideologies".[143] In general, Au and Chiu agreed Kalvin Ho (ADPL) is a moderate, traditional democrat; Lam Cheuk-ting and Helena Wong (both Democratic) are relatively China-friendly, moderate, traditional democrats;[131] both Raymond Chan (People Power) and Leung Kwok-hung (LSD) are progressive democrats but not radical;[138] while William Or (Community Alliance) was also a moderate, but was not a reason for his heavy defeat in the primaries;[145] Tat Cheng and Lee Yue-shun (Civic) are not radicals despite their party joined the "resistance camp".[141][144]
Au said the pro-democracy camp was divided in two groups, one advocating negotiations by winning a majority in the chamber, another pushed for "lam chau" to force the government to concede and to break the impasse in despair.[131][145]
During the protest the concept of unity between the radicals and moderates (Chinese: 和勇不分) emerged, Au explained "radicals" referred to those participated in riots and threw Molotov cocktails whilst "moderates" joined in peaceful rallies, and that the bonding in-between extended the protest movement.[138]
When asked by the judge, Chiu said "localists" focus on local cultures and values but do not go as far as advocating independence, but the "anti-government" "resistance camp" only formed after the primaries and were unsatisfied with the traditional democrats.[144]
Mike Lam, who first announced running in indirectly elected Import and Export constituency but changed his mind to run in New Territories East for the primary, said his decision was made due to "corrupted system" of the functional constituencies. Lam eventually returned to the Import and Export election after losing the primaries.
Divided with Tai
[edit]Explicitly pointing out the disagreement between him and Tai over the veto manifesto, Au and Chiu said their missions and wishes were to co-ordinate their colleagues to achieve a majority in the legislative election, but not to bundle the candidates to block the budget or to advocate "lam chau", while Tai was focusing on the veto power after securing the control of parliament. Au insisted the veto manifesto is never part of the plan to secure a legislative primary,[145] but Tai was "hard-selling" the manifesto. He trashed his "lam chau" plan as a "final fantasy", "unrealistic", and "apocalyptic",[138] and labelled the coordination process in the latter stage of the primaries is "undemocratic" and "infighting".[145] Having first read the plan only after the Chinese officials denounced the poll, Chiu thought the plan would lead to a "nuclear explosion-like" end.[142]
Au also agreed even the concept of "five demands", which primaries' candidates were asked to agree, was not clearly defined,[131] and he personally does not believe all demands could be achieved,[138] neither is the "35+" plan for majority. Au analysed that the pro-democracy camp has been "fragmentated" since 2016 without commanding force, not even Tai himself, and that all democrats would vote in bloc after a victorious election is only a "hypothesis" proposed by Tai, but not a "shared vision". Au agreed the "constitutional weapon" is "flawed" as the views of members representing the functional constituencies, which were representing the interests of professionals and businesses and also targets of the "35+" plan, were not fully considered. The blueprint of sweeping into power after controlling the parliament is, in Au's words, a "joke" as Hong Kong is in an "executive-led" system.[145]
Chiu recalled Tai's effort to shore up "constitutional confrontation" as early as 2018 wishing no candidates in the next year's local elections would be elected unopposed, which led to the emergence of localists, populists, and political novices. He was particularly enraged by Tai's "irresponsible" article in April that ensued the vetoing of budget after winning a majority without any consensuses between the democrats, saying Tai acted like "the sole leader of Hong Kong's pro-democracy camp". Chiu, who agreed there is resentment with Tai,[144] added that, in hindsight, PfD would not agree to hold the primaries had he read the commentary.[140]
Chung believed it is "rather challenging" for the democracy movement to win the control of parliament in the election because of PR voting method, considering the vote share of the camp did not significantly increased in the 2019 local elections, but Tai was "very optimistic" on securing the desired seats.[146]
Nevertheless, Chiu's testimony, which Chiu requested to amend and clarify on few occasions during the trial,[144][147] was repeatedly questioned by the justice panel. For one instance, Chiu said wording of "liberate Hong Kong" and "suppress Hong Kong communist regime" on PfD's website was drafted by his colleagues. Chiu also claimed PfD or himself were "overridden" by Tai, but the judge said these were not recorded in any documents, even a report of PfD after the primary thanked the two coordinators. In defense, Chiu said those were drafted by PfD Secretary-general Luke Lai King-fai, who also minuted the coordination meeting.[141] Trevor Beel, representing Gwyneth Ho, grilled Chiu for his credibility for pretending to be a moderate, but was interrupted by the judge who reminded him for possible adverse impact. Chiu then strongly disagreed with those accusations.[144] Chung's statement in court regarding Ho were twice furiously denied by Ho herself.[148]
Anonymous video
[edit]On the second day of the trial, a video was played in courtroom showing a closed-door meeting held in May 2020, attended by Benny Tai and other democrats,[132] when Tai suggested launching the primary election and other details of the plan,including indiscriminate rejection of the budget and not running for election after losing the primary election. The prosecution also pointed out that Benny Tai regarded the pursuit of achieving the "35+" majority in the Legislative Council as a means to achieve the five demands and a strategy of mutual destruction, which eventually led to the government shutdown and Western sanctions on China.[149] As the footage was shaky and shot below a table, with the camera pointing towards Tai from time to time, questions arise over who recorded the video.
The recorder of the video later testified anonymously in court during the fourteenth week of hearing, only to be identified as Mr. X.[146] Points Media, formed by overseas Hongkongers, identified Kim Chan, once joined pro-Beijing party DAB, as the recorder.[150] Chan's attendance in the meeting was confirmed by ex-District Councillor Michael Mo.[151] The attorneys of defendants also confirmed the rumour.[152]
"Mr. X" testified that Tai first mentioned the idea of triggering a government shutdown by vetoing the budget between December 2019 and January 2020. He was invited by Leung Ka-shing of People's Power to sit in a coordination meeting, and decided to record it because he suspected Tai's idea could be illegal and the footage could allow him to "study" further. When asked why the video was shaky, Mr. X insisted he publicly recorded without hiding. He anonymously sent the videos and recordings to the police in September and October 2020, and started assisting the police in April 2021. "Mr. X", a former secretary to a pro-Beijing member, said he sometimes support the pro-democracy camp while sometimes does not, but denied recording the meeting upon other's request.[146]
Other witnesses
[edit]Other than the four defendants testifying against fellow democrats and "Mr. X", the prosecution also summoned other witnesses. New Territories East returning officer Amy Yeung Wai-sum, who invalidated Gwyneth Ho's nomination, said officials of Constitutional Affairs Bureau provided Facebook posts of Ho during political screening. She said the disqualification letter was drafted by others and signed by her.[153]
A police officer from the national security department confirmed a Facebook account with pseudo-name was shared by national security cops. She agreed a comment posted by this account under one of the Tai's post, which reads "you will reap what you sow even you didn't break the law!!", was intended to provoke other responses. One national security police said he does not know what is Tai's "lam chau plan" even though arresting Gwyneth Ho for attempting to achieve the plan. Three other cops confirmed Apple Daily, Stand News, and Independent Media handed in documents related to advertisement of the primaries as ordered by the law enforcement.[153]
Defendant's testimony
[edit]Prosecutor's controversy
[edit]The leading prosecutor, Anthony Chau, was repeatedly questioned by the judges in court.
The co-conspirator rule was applied by the prosecution to charge the defendants. Under the legal principle, statements made outside court by an alleged co-conspirator to another can be admitted as evidence against all involved so to establish the existence of a conspiracy and the roles of those involved.[154] In the third week of trial, the prosecution argued any comments by any defendants could be evidence, but was challenged by judge.[143] A 25-page list of evidences against all defendants was submitted to the judges in the fourth week, including websites or posts of individual activists and political parties. The prosecution affirmed an agreement between Au and Tai was made on 15 February 2020 after an article on plan of getting a parliamentary majority was published, before the security law was enacted.[155]
In the eighth week the prosecutors accused two individuals whose names did not appear in the indictment nor arrested as co-conspirators, then Kwun Tong District Council chairman Choy Chak-hung, who was involved in the coordination, and Luke Lai. A judge was dismayed at prosecution for not showing a list of co-conspirators after weeks of trial.[140] Lai, a witness for prosecution, left Hong Kong for the UK in July 2021, therefore suspected by Michael Mo as another police informant.[156] Dennis Kwok, former MP (Civic) was listed as a conspirator in the tenth week.[141]
After playing a total of 7 hours of video of election forum and press conferences, the prosecutors intended to show other footages, only to be stopped by judges for wasting time. The questioning technique was attacked by the three justices for not following chronological order, lack of basis, meaning, and appropriateness.[143]
On the 50th day of the trial, the prosecution revealed Ben Chung's mobile phone was finally unlocked thanks to technological advancement. The judge expressed discontent and concerned the potential delay caused by the new development.[147]
Paid court goers
[edit]Hundreds of people had lined up outside the court before the start, vying for tickets allocated for the public to sit in the main court room. Some of those waiting said they did not know what case they were waiting for, while some filmed journalists. A group of women who had obtained tickets were later seen leaving before the hearing commenced.
Hong Kong Free Press noted that some people who waited in line to attend the trial were potentially paid, and did not attend the trial after receiving a ticket.[157] A family member of a defendant said "It is obvious that someone is trying to stop the general public from observing the case."[157] InMedia reporters, operating undercover, were paid HK$800 to spend the night queuing for tickets; multiple groups, some with pro-government links, were suspected to be coordinating payments to people to queue and obtain tickets.[158]
Verdict and sentence
[edit]On 30 May 2024, 14 of 47 activists were convicted and found guilty while two activists were acquitted: Lawrence Lau and Lee Yue-shun. The convicted were remanded until their sentencing.[139] The remaining 31 activists agreed to plead guilty.[159] On 13 June, the Department of Justice announced that it would appeal against the acquittal of Lau but not that of Lee.[160]
On 19 November 2024, the 45 convicted activists were handed down prison sentences between 4 and 10 years by the High Court.[161][159]
Name | Verdict date | Verdict | Sentence |
---|---|---|---|
Gordon Ng Ching-hang | 30 May 2024 | Guilty | 7 years, 3 months |
Cheng Tat-hung | Guilty | 6 years, 6 months | |
Clarisse Yeung Suet-ying | Guilty | 6 years, 6 months | |
Michael Pang Cheuk-kei | Guilty | 6 years, 6 months | |
Lee Yue-shun | Not guilty | ||
Kalvin Ho Kai-ming | Guilty | 6 years, 7 months | |
Helena Wong Pik-wan | Guilty | 6 years, 6 months | |
Lawrence Lau Wai-chung | Not guilty | ||
Sze Tak-loy | Guilty | 6 years, 7 months | |
Gwyneth Ho Kwai-lam | Guilty | 7 years | |
Raymond Chan Chi-chuen | Guilty | 6 years, 6 months | |
Owen Chow Ka-shing | Guilty | 7 years, 9 months | |
Lam Cheuk-ting | Guilty | 6 years, 9 months | |
Leung Kwok-hung | Guilty | 6 years, 9 months | |
Ricky Or Yiu-lam | Guilty | 6 years, 7 months | |
Winnie Yu Wai-ming | Guilty | 6 years, 9 months | |
Benny Tai Yiu-ting | 19 November 2024 | Guilty | 10 years |
Au Nok-hin | Guilty | 6 years, 9 months | |
Andrew Chiu Ka-yin | Guilty | 7 years | |
Ben Chung Kam-lun | Guilty | 6 years, 1 months | |
Tiffany Yuen Ka-wai | Guilty | 4 years, 3 months | |
Fergus Leung Fong-wai | Guilty | 4 years, 11 months | |
Andy Chui Chi-kin | Guilty | 4 years, 2 months | |
Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit | Guilty | 4 years, 3 months | |
Claudia Mo Man-ching | Guilty | 4 years, 2 months | |
Frankie Fung Tat-chun | Guilty | 4 years, 5 months | |
Nathan Lau Chak-fung | Guilty | 4 years, 5 months | |
Joshua Wong Chi-fung | Guilty | 4 years, 8 months | |
Jeremy Jansen Tam Man-ho | Guilty | 4 years, 2 months | |
Kinda Li Ka-tat | Guilty | 4 years, 3 months | |
Tam Tak-chi | Guilty | 4 years, 5 months | |
Wu Chi-wai | Guilty | 4 years, 5 months | |
Eddie Chu Hoi-dick | 19 November 2024 | Guilty | 4 years, 5 months |
Sam Cheung Ho-sum | Guilty | 4 years, 11 months | |
Prince Wong Ji-yuet | Guilty | 4 years, 5 months | |
Ng Kin-wai | Guilty | 5 years, 7 months | |
Andrew Wan Siu-kin | Guilty | 4 years, 8 months | |
Kwok Ka-ki | Guilty | 4 years, 2 months | |
Carol Ng Man-yee | Guilty | 4 years, 5 months | |
Roy Tam Hoi-pong | Guilty | 4 years, 3 months | |
Ventus Lau Wing-hong | Guilty | 4 years, 5 months | |
Alvin Yeung Ngok-kiu | Guilty | 5 years, 1 months | |
Gary Fan Kwok-wai | Guilty | 4 years, 2 months | |
Hendrick Lui Chi-hang | Guilty | 4 years, 3 months | |
Mike Lam King-nam | Guilty | 5 years, 2 months | |
Lester Shum Ngo-fai | Guilty | 4 years, 6 months | |
Henry Wong Pak-yu | Guilty | 4 years, 3 months |
Aftermath
[edit]Reactions
[edit]Hong Kong government
[edit]On the day of the sentencing, Secretary for Security Chris Tang said during the press conference that the overall sentencing has already reflected the severity of the offence and he wanted to look into individual cases to see if there is any need to review the case.[162]
Chief Executive John Lee said that the court confirmed that the offence of the defendants was extremely serious and they should be severely punished and the case shows that anyone who intends to subvert state power and endanger national security will ultimately be punished in accordance with the law. The government issued a press release stating that the defendants led by Benny Tai are investing a great deal of time and money in premeditating and planning the so-called primary election, which showed that they had a long-term plan to make the scheme a success, and all the defendants who participated in the primary election played an essential role in the whole scheme.[163]
Hong Kong Security Minister Chris Tang said the sentences reflect the severity of the offenses. Tang said national security helps safeguard the city's prosperity, so his government takes any violations of the law seriously.[164]
Mainland China
[edit]The State Council's Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office (HKMAO) said in a commentary on 25 November 2024 that Tai and others were “far from being genuine advocates” for democracy. Rather they were its “true destructors” as they had promoted a plan that would have betrayed the country and harmed the interests of Hongkongers, it said.[165]
Republic of China
[edit]United States
[edit]The United States and European Union condemned the sentencing of the democrats.[159]
European Union
[edit]Japan
[edit]Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi said during the press conference that the Japanese government expressed serious concern for the situation that undermines the one country, two systems framework. He called on the Chinese government and Hong Kong authorities to respect the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong citizens, while working closely with the international community to exert strong pressure.[166]
Appeals
[edit]In the weeks following sentencing, 13 of the 45 democrats announced that they had lodged appeals. Twelve, who had pleaded not guilty, are appealing both sentence and conviction, namely: Owen Chow, Helena Wong, Clarisse Yeung, Winnie Yu, Lam Cheuk Ting, Gordon Ng, Michael Pang, Gwyneth Ho, Raymond Chan, Tat Cheng, Kalvin Ho, and Leung Kwok Hung. Tam Tak-chi, who pled guilty, is appealing his sentence.[167]
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ Joshua Wong and Tam Tak-chi were arrested in jail.
References
[edit]- ^ a b Jordan, Primrose; Chan, Ho-him (23 June 2022). "She was loved for standing up to China. She may die in jail". Financial Times. Retrieved 23 June 2022.
- ^ Wang, Vivian; Ramzy, Austin; May, Tiffany (5 January 2021). "Hong Kong Police Arrest Dozens of Pro-Democracy Leaders". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 21 January 2021. Retrieved 23 January 2021.
- ^ Zhou, Viola (6 January 2021). "Hong Kong Has Arrested Almost Everyone in the Political Opposition". Vice. Archived from the original on 28 April 2021. Retrieved 7 January 2021.
- ^ a b Ramzy, Austin (1 March 2021). "Hundreds in rare Hong Kong protest as opposition figures are charged". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 6 March 2021. Retrieved 16 August 2021.
- ^ Davidson, Helen (30 June 2021). "'They can't speak freely': Hong Kong a year after the national security law". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 13 August 2021. Retrieved 16 August 2021.
- ^ a b Ho, Kelly (3 March 2022). "Hong Kong democrats' subversion case adjourned to late April, courts may close amid Covid-19". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 25 May 2022. Retrieved 10 March 2022.
- ^ a b Ho, Kelly (28 April 2022). "47 democrats' subversion case adjourned to June". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 25 May 2022. Retrieved 29 April 2022.
- ^ "Explainer: Hong Kong's national security crackdown – month 32". Hong Kong Free Press. 6 March 2023. Retrieved 6 March 2023.
- ^ a b Lee, James (4 December 2023). "Hong Kong 47: Landmark national security trial comes to a close, with 'no guarantees' of when verdict is expected". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 8 May 2023.
- ^ "戴耀廷倡「去中心化」雷動2.0 搶攻功能界別 冀泛民佔立會過半". 信報財經新聞 (in Traditional Chinese). 2 December 2019. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 15 January 2021.
- ^ "Explainer: what is Benny Tai's "10 steps to burn with us"". The Standard. 6 January 2021. Retrieved 27 February 2023.
- ^ Davis, Michael C. (2022). "Hong Kong: How Beijing Perfected Repression". Journal of Democracy. 33 (1): 100–115. doi:10.1353/jod.2022.0007. S2CID 247624487.
- ^ Wong, Rachel (9 July 2020). "Hong Kong legislative primaries may violate national security law, mainland affairs minister warns". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 18 August 2020. Retrieved 10 July 2020.
- ^ Wong, Rachel (12 July 2020). "'Hong Kong people made history again': Over 600,000 vote in democrats' primaries as co-organiser hails 'miracle' turnout". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 31 July 2020. Retrieved 12 July 2020.
- ^ a b Cheung, Tony; Wong, Natalie; Cheng, Lilian (13 July 2020). "Hong Kong's traditional opposition parties lose out to localist challengers in fierce weekend primary for coming Legislative Council election". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 14 July 2020. Retrieved 14 July 2020.
- ^ Chung, Kimmy; Lau, Chris (14 July 2020). "Hong Kong elections: Beijing issues strongest condemnation yet of opposition's primary vote, accusing organiser Benny Tai of manipulating polling system". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 14 July 2020. Retrieved 14 July 2020.
- ^ "Police serve pro-democracy newsrooms with search warrants over 2020 pro-democracy primaries amid mass arrests". Hong Kong Free Press. 6 January 2021. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 15 January 2021.
- ^ Shum, Maggie (12 January 2021). "In Hong Kong, dozens of arrests for pro-democracy activities will have a chilling effect". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 21 January 2021. Retrieved 23 January 2021.
- ^ a b c d "Hong Kong: Police arrest over 50 pro-democracy activists in crackdown". Deutsche Welle. 6 January 2021. Archived from the original on 21 January 2021. Retrieved 23 January 2021.
- ^ "Hong Kong: Mass Arrests of Pro-Democracy Politicians". Human Rights Watch. 8 January 2021. Archived from the original on 15 January 2021. Retrieved 15 January 2021.
- ^ Cheng, Selina (6 January 2021). "American lawyer John Clancey among Hong Kong mass arrests as police raid law firm Ho Tse Wai & Partners". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 15 January 2021.
- ^ "53 Hong Kong democrats, activists arrested under security law over 2020 legislative primaries". Hong Kong Free Press. 6 January 2021. Archived from the original on 6 January 2021. Retrieved 23 January 2021.
- ^ Ho, Kelly (6 January 2021). "Hong Kong police say 53 were arrested for trying to use strategic voting to win election, veto budget & shut down gov't". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 7 December 2021. Retrieved 8 September 2021.
- ^ a b Chau, Candice (6 January 2021). "Security chief says mass arrest of democrats 'necessary' due to 'malicious' plot to paralyse Hong Kong". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 7 December 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2021.
- ^ "全日總覽|53被捕泛民陸續保釋 戴耀廷:香港進入寒冬". HK01. 7 January 2021. Archived from the original on 20 January 2021. Retrieved 15 January 2021.
- ^ Chau, Candice (8 January 2021). "'Hong Kong has entered a bitter winter,' says primaries organiser as 52 democrats in mass arrest bailed out". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 31 January 2021. Retrieved 4 February 2021.
- ^ "HKSAR Government will not tolerate any offence of subversion". Government of Hong Kong. Archived from the original on 27 January 2021. Retrieved 8 September 2021.
- ^ "Vetoing all govt funding request can be illegal: Ronny Tong". The Standard. 6 January 2020. Archived from the original on 28 July 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2021.
- ^ Marlow, Iain; Lung, Natalie; Liu, Alfred (6 January 2021). "Hong Kong Arrests U.S. Citizen, Dozens More Under Security Law". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on 16 August 2021. Retrieved 16 August 2021.
- ^ "Govt must explain puzzling arrests: Michael Tien". RTHK. 7 January 2021. Archived from the original on 28 July 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2021.
- ^ "At Least 50 Hong Kong Pro-Democracy Figures Arrested in Pre-Dawn Raids". Voice of America. 6 January 2021. Archived from the original on 28 July 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2021.
- ^ Lau, Jessie (6 January 2021). "Hong Kong Police Arrest 53 Pro-Democrats on Subversion Charges". The Diplomat. Archived from the original on 20 January 2021. Retrieved 15 January 2021.
- ^ "35+大搜捕|羅冠聰、許智峯、張崑陽:港史上最大規模打壓 各國應採實際行動回應". 明報新聞網 – 即時新聞 instant news (in Traditional Chinese). Archived from the original on 6 January 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2021.
- ^ Low, Zoe (6 January 2021). "Hong Kong national security law: a 35-plus ambition, 'colour revolution' and the 'resistance' – what led to biggest mass arrests under legislation?". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 25 April 2021. Retrieved 16 August 2021.
- ^ "National security law: Hong Kong rounds up 53 pro-democracy activists". BBC News. 6 January 2021. Archived from the original on 11 February 2021. Retrieved 16 August 2021.
- ^ Ramzy, Austin (1 March 2021). "Hundreds in Rare Hong Kong Protest as Opposition Figures Are Charged". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 6 March 2021. Retrieved 8 March 2021.
- ^ Ho, Kelly (6 March 2021). "Hong Kong Justice Dep't gives conflicting remarks over Beijing official who urged 'severe punishment' of democrats during active court case". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 6 March 2021. Retrieved 8 March 2021.
- ^ "Explainer: Hong Kong's national security crackdown – month 48". Hong Kong Free Press. 30 June 2024. Retrieved 3 July 2024.
- ^ Everington, Keoni (7 January 2021). "Taiwan president condemns arrest of 53 Hong Kong activists". Taiwan News. Archived from the original on 7 January 2021. Retrieved 23 January 2020.
- ^ "US Secretary of State Pompeo threatens sanctions over Hong Kong mass arrests". France 24. 7 January 2021. Retrieved 8 May 2024.
- ^ "Designating PRC and Hong Kong Officials After Widespread Pro-Democracy Arrests in Hong Kong". U.S. Department of State. 15 January 2021. Archived from the original on 15 January 2021. Retrieved 16 January 2021.
- ^ a b c Wintour, Patrick (6 January 2021). "China 'misled world' on Hong Kong security law, says Dominic Raab". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 7 January 2021. Retrieved 15 January 2021.
- ^ "European Union Parliament calls for sanctions on Carrie Lam; release of activists and opposition figures". The Standard. 22 January 2021. Archived from the original on 28 January 2021. Retrieved 23 January 2021.
- ^ Ryall, Julian (25 February 2021). "Japan tells China it 'can't tolerate mass arrests' in Hong Kong". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 30 May 2021.
- ^ Suzuki, Keisuke [@SuzukiKeisukeMP] (6 January 2021). "The current situation in Hong Kong is very serious and critical. We should recognize that these behaviours, breaking the international agreement, challenging to the "shared value" such as democracy, freedom, human rights should be the reality of the CCP" (Tweet). Retrieved 30 June 2021 – via Twitter.
- ^ "Over 50 Hong Kong democrats arrested under security law over 2020 legislative primaries". Hong Kong Free Press. 6 January 2021. Archived from the original on 6 January 2021. Retrieved 15 January 2021.
- ^ Mahtani, Shibani; McLaughlin, Timothy; Yu, Theodora (28 February 2021). "Dozens of Hong Kong pro-democracy activists charged under national security law". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 28 February 2021. Retrieved 28 February 2021.
- ^ Soo Lindberg, Kari; Kwan, Shawna; Lung, Natalie (28 February 2021). "Hong Kong Charges 47 Opposition Activists Under Security Law". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on 28 February 2021. Retrieved 28 February 2021.
- ^ "【持續更新】涉嫌去年組織參與民主派初選被拘捕及起訴人士名單". now news. 28 February 2021. Archived from the original on 27 February 2021. Retrieved 28 February 2021.
- ^ Pang, Jessie; Pomfret, James (28 February 2021). "Dozens of leading Hong Kong democrats charged with subversion in major national security crackdown". Reuters. Archived from the original on 7 December 2021. Retrieved 28 February 2021.
- ^ Cheng, Selina (3 November 2021). "Judge reveals reasoning for Hong Kong democrats' bail decisions". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 7 December 2021. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
- ^ a b Pang, Jessie (8 July 2021). "Court case of 47 Hong Kong democracy activists to resume on Sept 23". Reuters. Archived from the original on 12 July 2021. Retrieved 12 July 2021.
- ^ Davidson, Helen (1 March 2021). "Protesters swamp Hong Kong court after pro-democracy figures charged". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 8 March 2021. Retrieved 8 March 2021.
- ^ a b Chan, Michelle (4 March 2021). "Dozens of Hong Kong democrats denied bail in subversion case". Nikkei Asia. Archived from the original on 4 March 2021. Retrieved 4 March 2021.
- ^ a b Cheng, Selina (2 March 2021). "Bail hearing for 47 Hong Kong democrats facing security law charges drags on, with four hospitalised due to exhaustion". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 8 March 2021. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
- ^ "Hong Kong: Activists back in Court". Asia Media Centre. 3 March 2021. Archived from the original on 3 March 2021. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
- ^ Taylor, Jerome; Zhao, Yan (2 March 2021). "Marathon Bail Hearing For Hong Kong Dissidents To Stretch Into Third Day". International Business Times. Archived from the original on 7 December 2021. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
- ^ a b c Shum, Michael (3 March 2021). "Tears, fatigue and no-bathing gripes as bail marathon halted". The Standard. Archived from the original on 2 March 2021. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
- ^ a b c Lo, Chloe (4 March 2021). "Hong Kong Activists' Extended Bail Hearing Enters Fourth Day". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 4 March 2021. Retrieved 4 March 2021.
- ^ "Apple Daily" 47民主派提堂連續第三天聆訊 開庭前直播遭滅聲家屬鼓噪 吳靄儀指不應限制旁聽內容. Apple Daily (in Chinese). 3 March 2021. Archived from the original on 4 May 2021.
- ^ "Four activists resign from Civic Party". The Standard. 3 March 2021. Archived from the original on 3 March 2021. Retrieved 3 March 2021.
- ^ Shum, Michael (4 March 2021). "Political ties severed, civic stalwarts cry out". The Standard. Archived from the original on 3 March 2021. Retrieved 4 March 2021.
- ^ a b c d Ho, Kelly (4 March 2021). "Hong Kong court refuses to lift reporting restrictions on bail hearing for democrats facing security law charges, despite online leaks". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 8 March 2021.
- ^ Ho, Kelly (4 March 2021). "All 47 democrats facing security law charges remanded in custody after Dep't of Justice appeals against bail decision for 15". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 30 May 2024.
- ^ Pang, Jessie (31 May 2021). "Court case of 47 Hong Kong democracy activists to resume on July 8". Reuters. Archived from the original on 31 May 2021. Retrieved 1 June 2021.
- ^ "Court case of 47 HK activists to resume on July 8". The Straits Times. 1 June 2021. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 1 June 2021.
- ^ Pang, Jessie (23 September 2021). "Court case of 47 Hong Kong democracy activists to resume on Nov. 29". Reuters. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 23 September 2021.
- ^ Ho, Kelly (30 November 2021). "Security law: Dozens of Hong Kong democrats to spend festive season in detention – subversion trial date still unclear". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 7 December 2021. Retrieved 30 November 2021.
- ^ Davidson, Helen (8 July 2021). "Hong Kong trial of 47 pro-democracy activists delayed for 11 weeks". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 12 July 2021. Retrieved 13 July 2021.
- ^ Li, Almond (26 April 2022). "Hong Kong nat'l security judge urges speedy trial for 47 democrats, more than a year after most taken into custody". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 17 February 2023.
- ^ "【初選47人案】何桂藍等17人終交付高院審理 戴耀廷等30人明早再訊 | 獨媒報導". 獨立媒體. 1 June 2022. Retrieved 2 June 2022.
- ^ a b Ho, Kelly (6 June 2022). "Dozens of Hong Kong democrats may face life in prison as national security case transferred to High Court". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 7 June 2022.
- ^ "47人案|律政司確認吳政亨周三交付高院 所有被告程序完成 高院暫未有審期 – 法庭線 The Witness". 8 July 2022. Retrieved 17 February 2023.
- ^ a b c d e "Four pro-democracy suspects to be released on bail". RTHK. 5 March 2021. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 5 March 2021.
- ^ Pang, Jessie (12 March 2021). "Twenty-one Hong Kong activists remain in custody after court rejects bail appeals". Reuters. Archived from the original on 12 March 2021. Retrieved 12 March 2021.
- ^ a b Chau, Candice (11 March 2021). "Hong Kong court grants bail to democrat arrested under security law rejecting justice dep't appeal, revokes bail for another". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 11 March 2021. Retrieved 11 March 2021.
- ^ Shum, Michael (12 March 2021). "Democrats battle to win their bail pleas". The Standard. Archived from the original on 15 March 2021. Retrieved 12 March 2021.
- ^ a b c d e Tam, Sharon; Pang, Jessie (13 March 2021). "Court releases three Hong Kong activists on bail in case involving 47". Reuters. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 14 March 2021.
- ^ a b c d Ho, Kelly (15 March 2021). "Hong Kong court approves bail for three more democrats facing national security charges". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 16 March 2021.
- ^ a b "民主派初選47人案|李予信准保釋 官︰李予信未作初選相關行為言論 (17:48) – 20210422 – 即時港聞". 明報新聞網 – 即時新聞 instant news (in Traditional Chinese). Archived from the original on 13 February 2022. Retrieved 13 February 2022.
- ^ ""Slow Beat" Raymond Chan Chi-chuen granted bail". The Standard. 16 September 2021. Archived from the original on 16 September 2021. Retrieved 16 September 2021.
- ^ a b Wong, Brian (2 November 2021). "Hong Kong judge cites localist group ex-leader's record as lawmaker in granting bail". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2 November 2021. Retrieved 2 November 2021.
- ^ a b "【初選47人案】陳志全獲保釋 判詞指梁君彥大讚勤力有建設 | 獨媒報導". 獨立媒體. 2 November 2021. Archived from the original on 4 November 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
- ^ Cheng, Selina (22 December 2021). "47 democrats national security case: Hong Kong activist Wong ji-yuet granted bail ahead of Christmas". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 25 May 2022. Retrieved 22 December 2021.
- ^ "黃子悅初選案獲保釋 官引代表大律師稱首要目標完成學位並獲老師高度評價 (18:21) – 20220503 – 港聞". 即時新聞. Archived from the original on 18 May 2022. Retrieved 18 May 2022.
- ^ "涉初選案伍健偉申保釋被拒 (13:14) – 20220606 – 港聞". 明報新聞網 – 即時新聞 instant news (in Traditional Chinese). Retrieved 11 July 2022.
- ^ Witness, The (15 July 2022). "47 人案|伍健偉 6 月高院申保釋被拒 法官頒判詞:曾與庭內支持者輪流叫喊 – 法庭線 The Witness". Retrieved 16 July 2022.[permanent dead link ]
- ^ Wong, Brian (22 April 2021). "Hong Kong judge denied bail to ex-lawmaker charged under national security law after learning he was invited by US consulate 'for coffee', judiciary reveals". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 7 May 2021.
- ^ a b Wong, Brian (9 April 2021). "Judiciary reveals bail decision reasons in several security law cases". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 13 February 2022. Retrieved 13 February 2022.
- ^ Chau, Candice (29 March 2021). "Hong Kong court denies bail to ex-lawmaker charged under national security law". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 30 March 2021. Retrieved 30 March 2021.
- ^ a b Wong, Brian (13 May 2021). "Hong Kong internet radio host facing money-laundering, sedition charges denied bail over Taiwan connections, High Court judge says". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 14 May 2021.
- ^ a b "Bail denied for "Giggs", "Longhair" and Jimmy Sham". The Standard. 13 May 2021. Archived from the original on 14 May 2021. Retrieved 14 May 2021.
- ^ "Judgment". legalref.judiciary.hk. Archived from the original on 3 June 2021. Retrieved 3 June 2021.
- ^ a b c d e f g Wong, Brian (1 June 2021). "National security law: bail rejected once more for seven Hong Kong opposition figures ahead of subversion trial". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 16 June 2021. Retrieved 21 June 2021.
- ^ "Jimmy Sham's bail denied by the court". The Standard. 12 April 2021. Archived from the original on 12 April 2021. Retrieved 12 April 2021.
- ^ "Claudia Mo denied bail in security law case". The Standard. 14 April 2021. Archived from the original on 28 April 2021. Retrieved 28 April 2021.
- ^ Kwan, Rhoda (28 May 2021). "Social media messages from Hong Kong democrat Claudia Mo to int'l media 'a threat to national security'". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 11 June 2022.
- ^ "民主派初選47人案|徐子見被高院拒保釋 官:發布影片中言辭惹法庭最大關注 (16:00) – 20210422 – 港聞". 明報新聞網 – 即時新聞 instant news (in Traditional Chinese). Archived from the original on 13 February 2022. Retrieved 13 February 2022.
- ^ "Result". legalref.judiciary.hk. Archived from the original on 23 June 2021. Retrieved 23 June 2021.
- ^ "毛孟靜尹兆堅被拒保釋 官指難保不危害國安". Wen Wei Po (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 29 May 2021. Retrieved 30 May 2021.
- ^ 頭條日報 (September 2021). "初選案|王百羽申保釋再被拒 法官擇日頒判決理由". 星島頭條 (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 9 November 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2021.
- ^ "【47 人案】王百羽申保釋被拒 高院今頒判詞 律政司:王政治影響力強及立場堅決 | 立場報道". Stand News (in Chinese). Hong Kong. Archived from the original on 11 October 2021. Retrieved 11 October 2021.
- ^ "民主派47人案|范國威高院申保釋被拒 (13:22) – 20210907 – 港聞". 即時新聞. Archived from the original on 27 September 2021. Retrieved 27 September 2021.
- ^ Ho, Kelly (14 September 2022). "Hong Kong activist denied bail pending trial in subversion case involving 47 democrats". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 15 September 2022.
- ^ Ho, Kelly (23 August 2021). "Hong Kong ex-district councillor Roy Tam denied bail pending national security trial". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 7 December 2021. Retrieved 23 August 2021.
- ^ "【47 人案】高院就拒絕譚凱邦保釋頒判詞 稱曾揚言「清算所有前黑警立法會保安」 | 立場報道". Stand News (in Chinese). Hong Kong. Archived from the original on 20 September 2021. Retrieved 20 September 2021.
- ^ Siu, Jasmine (20 September 2021). "Judge denies activist bail after deciding he still threatens national security". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 20 September 2021. Retrieved 20 September 2021.
- ^ Siu, Jasmine (8 September 2021). "Opposition activist drops bail plan after reporting restrictions bid fails". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 8 September 2021. Retrieved 8 September 2021.
- ^ "【初選47人案】何桂藍申撤銷報導保釋限制遭拒 即撤回保釋申請 | 獨媒報導". 獨立媒體. 8 September 2021. Archived from the original on 8 September 2021. Retrieved 8 September 2021.
- ^ "【初選47人案】馮達浚高院申請保釋即時被拒". Inmedia. 4 November 2021. Archived from the original on 4 November 2021. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
- ^ Chau, Candice (6 April 2022). "Co-founder of defunct Hong Kong media outlet DB Channel denied bail over calls for int'l sanctions, judgement reveals". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 25 May 2022. Retrieved 7 April 2022.
- ^ "【初選47人案】吳敏兒還柙達9個月 今高院申保釋被拒 被押走時哽咽稱:出年見啦! | 獨媒報導". 獨立媒體. 20 December 2021. Archived from the original on 22 December 2021. Retrieved 22 December 2021.
- ^ "吳敏兒初選案被拒保釋 官判辭稱言論挑起對政府怨恨 具國際影響力易聯合他人反政府 (17:23) – 20220428 – 港聞". 明報新聞網 – 即時新聞 instant news (in Traditional Chinese). Archived from the original on 28 April 2022. Retrieved 28 April 2022.
- ^ Chau, Candice (13 May 2022). "Hong Kong court rejects ex-lawmaker's bail application in 47 democrats national security case". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 25 May 2022. Retrieved 13 May 2022.
- ^ "47 人案|高院就拒林卓廷保釋頒判詞 官:林擁強大政治影響力 – 法庭線 The Witness". 29 June 2022. Retrieved 5 July 2022.
- ^ Leung, Kanis; Siu, Jasmine (7 May 2021). "Hong Kong ex-lawmaker on urgent bail no-show yet at father's funeral". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 8 July 2023.
- ^ Wong, Brian (12 August 2021). "National security law defendant granted bail so he can finish nursing degree". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 14 September 2021. Retrieved 14 September 2021.
- ^ Lee, Peter (13 January 2022). "Hong Kong democrat Owen Chow awaiting national security trial has bail revoked for violating terms". Hong Kong Free Press. Archived from the original on 25 May 2022. Retrieved 13 January 2022.
- ^ Pang, Jessie (13 January 2022). "Hong Kong activist's bail revoked for remarks 'endangering national security'". Reuters. Archived from the original on 13 January 2022. Retrieved 13 January 2022.
- ^ Siu, Jasmine (14 September 2021). "Subversion accused without overseas link posed no flight risk: Hong Kong judge". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 21 September 2021. Retrieved 20 September 2021.
- ^ "One of 47 pro-democracy suspects freed after months – RTHK". RTHK. Archived from the original on 28 July 2021. Retrieved 28 July 2021.
- ^ "【初選47人案】余慧明違保釋條件 遭撤銷擔保即時還柙 庭上呼:幫我睇住啲貓 | 獨媒報導". 獨立媒體. 8 March 2022. Archived from the original on 9 March 2022. Retrieved 9 March 2022.
- ^ Wong, Brian (8 March 2022). "National security law: Hong Kong activist sent back to jail after bail breach". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 9 March 2022. Retrieved 9 March 2022.
- ^ "Non-jury trial ordered for Hong Kong's 47 democrats national security case". Hong Kong Free Press. AFP. 16 August 2022. Retrieved 6 September 2022.
- ^ "Hong Kong political activists plead guilty amid crackdown". Associated Press. 18 August 2022. Retrieved 1 November 2022.
- ^ a b Davidson, Helen; Ho, Kelly; Chau, Candice (6 February 2023). "Hong Kong: landmark national security trial of 47 democracy advocates begins". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 6 February 2023.
- ^ Lee, Peter (12 January 2023). "Democrats who pleaded guilty under Hong Kong's security law must wait until after co-defendants' trial for sentencing". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 12 January 2023.
- ^ Chau, Candice (17 January 2023). "Another defendant in Hong Kong's 47 democrats national security case to plead guilty, as trial delayed by a week". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 18 January 2023.
- ^ "Landmark trial of Hong Kong 47 gets under way amid tight security". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 6 February 2023.
- ^ Wong, Brian (5 February 2023). "2 Hong Kong opposition figures to plead guilty to charges over unofficial poll". South China Morning Post. Retrieved 6 February 2023.
- ^ a b c d "【初選47人案】第五周審訊整理 區諾軒認辦初選目標與戴耀廷不同 中聯辦譴責後盡全力解散初選". Inmedia. 13 March 2023.
- ^ a b Ho, Kelly (7 February 2023). "Hong Kong 47: Activist's voting campaign formed 'backbone' of unofficial primaries, nat. security trial hears". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 7 February 2023.
- ^ Leung, Hillary (9 February 2023). "Hong Kong 47: Justice chief condemns violence after suspected projectile breaks court window". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 29 May 2023.
- ^ "SJ strongly condemns any violent acts intended to disrupt due administration of justice". www.info.gov.hk. Retrieved 29 May 2023.
- ^ "Protective screens installed after suspected projectile shattered courthouse window". The Standard. Retrieved 29 May 2023.
- ^ Ho, Kelly (13 February 2023). "Hong Kong 47: Ex-lawmaker Au Nok-hin testifies against fellow democrats during national security trial". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 17 February 2023.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i "47人案組織者證供1|重組經過:一場逾61萬港人參與初選 由源起至被指顛覆政權". The Witness. 21 May 2023. Retrieved 29 May 2023.
- ^ a b c d e f "【初選47人案】第六周審訊整理 區諾軒稱感被戴耀廷「騎劫」惟翌日改口 指「攬炒十步」為「狂想」不欲在港發生". Inmedia. 19 March 2023.
- ^ a b c "【初選47人案】第二周審訊整理 區諾軒作供稱「我驚背漏」 民主派就否決預算案現分歧". Inmedia. 19 February 2023.
- ^ a b c d "【初選47人案】第八周審訊整理 趙家賢稱戴耀廷「風雲計劃」起營造憲制抗爭 對戴未獲共識提「攬炒」感「好火滾」". Inmedia. 2 April 2023.
- ^ a b c d e f g "【初選47人案】第十周審訊整理 趙家賢稱感被戴耀廷「騎劫」惟屢遭官質疑 指答應辦初選因不想被邊緣化". Inmedia. 16 April 2023.
- ^ a b c d e f "【初選47人案】第九周審訊整理 趙家賢指抗爭派失控「唯有DQ自己」". Inmedia. 9 April 2023.
- ^ a b c d e f g "【初選47人案】第三周審訊整理 區諾軒:各區協議無公開惹爭議 戴耀廷初選後稱「不說癱瘓政府」". Inmedia. 26 February 2023.
- ^ a b c d e f g h "【初選47人案】第十一周審訊整理 何桂藍一方質疑趙家賢可信性 趙否認淡化參與換取減刑". Inmedia. 23 April 2023.
- ^ a b c d e f "【初選47人案】第七周審訊整理 區諾軒認「35+」可能失敗 指戴耀廷協調過程難言民主". Inmedia. 26 March 2023.
- ^ a b c "【初選47人案】第十四周審訊整理 鍾錦麟完成作供 證人X新西會議拍片交警方自言「光明正大」". Inmedia. 14 May 2023.
- ^ a b "【初選47人案】第十二周審訊整理 趙家賢完成作供 控方上周破解鍾錦麟手機". Inmedia. 30 April 2023.
- ^ "【初選47人案】第十三周審訊整理 鍾錦麟:民動2020年2月與戴耀廷有共識協辦初選、戴曾稱不要求無差別否決財案". 7 May 2023.
- ^ "Beijing blasts criticism against Hong Kong national security trial of 47 activists". The Standard. Retrieved 17 February 2023.
- ^ "47人初選案 偷拍者身份曝光 前議助陳鑫潛伏戴耀廷身邊逾兩年". 棱角媒體 (in Chinese (Hong Kong)). 8 February 2023. Retrieved 17 February 2023.
- ^ Michael Mo [@michaelmohk] (7 February 2023). "So, who are the core police informants in the #HongKong pro-democracy 47 case?" (Tweet). Retrieved 17 February 2023 – via Twitter.
- ^ "【初選47人案】第四周審訊整理 控方呈共謀證據表指證所有被告 辯方透露陳鑫為新西片段證人". Inmedia. 5 March 2023.
- ^ a b "【初選47人案】第十五周審訊整理 控方傳畢證人 押5.29處理「共謀者原則」法律爭議". Inmedia. 21 May 2023.
- ^ Ho, Kelly (27 February 2023). "Hong Kong 47: Prosecutors set out scope of evidence they will use to try and prove democrats' roles in conspiracy". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 29 May 2023.
- ^ "【初選47人案】控方就「共謀者原則」交25頁證據列表 公民黨抗爭派記者會等均用以指證所有被告". Inmedia. 27 February 2023.
- ^ Michael Mo [@michaelmohk] (8 April 2023). "I promised to talk about the 2nd informal of #HongKong pro-democracy #NSL47 case. Here's what I've got so far. A 🧵If you feel that's TLDR, here's a quick conclusion: That guy isn't under cover but made a deal w/ the NSL Gestapo to leave the city" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
- ^ a b "Hong Kong 47: Suspicions grow over 'paid' court goers, as people with public gallery tickets leave before hearing – Hong Kong Free Press HKFP". Hong Kong Free Press. 8 February 2023. Retrieved 8 February 2023.
- ^ Lee, Peter (15 February 2023). "Hong Kong 47: Evidence emerges of paid court goers with pro-establishment links – report". Hong Kong Free Press HKFP. Retrieved 15 February 2023.
- ^ a b c d Wong, Brian; Lam, Jeffie; Ma, Jess; Heung, Sammy; Chow, Fiona (19 November 2024). "Hong Kong 47: Benny Tai jailed for 10 years over plot to overthrow government". South China Morning Post.
- ^ Leung, Hillary (14 June 2024). "Hong Kong justice dept. will not appeal acquittal of democrat cleared in city's largest national security case". Hong Kong Free Press. Retrieved 15 July 2024.
- ^ Pomfret, James; Pang, Jessie (19 November 2024). "Hong Kong jails 45 democracy activists in landmark national security trial". Reuters. Archived from the original on 20 November 2024. Retrieved 19 November 2024.
- ^ "S for S speaks on sentence delivered by Court of First Instance on conspiracy to commit subversion case". www.info.gov.hk. Retrieved 21 November 2024.
- ^ "The Court of First Instance hands down sentence in case of conspiracy to commit subversion". www.info.gov.hk. Retrieved 21 November 2024.
- ^ "Hong Kong's jailing of 45 democracy activists sparks criticism from foreign governments, rights groups - CBS News". www.cbsnews.com. 19 November 2024. Retrieved 2 December 2024.
- ^ "Hong Kong 47: Beijing slams West over 'hypocritical double standards'". South China Morning Post. 23 November 2024. Retrieved 2 December 2024.
- ^ "2024年11月20日 — 日本林芳正官房長官在20日的記者會上表示,針對因違反中國習近平政權導入的《香港國家安全法》而被起訴的45名民主派人士被判刑的事件,他指出:「損害了對一國兩制的信任的情況持續發生,包括此次的判決在內,我們對此表示嚴重關切。」". Instagram. 20 November 2024. Retrieved 21 November 2024.
- ^ Hong Kong 47: Activist ‘Long Hair’ Leung Kwok-hung seeks to overturn conviction, sentence in national security case, Hong Kong Free Press, December 16, 2024