The short version
- Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung were sentenced to seven years in prison for inciting subversion, while Albert Ho received five years after pleading guilty.
- The convictions target the disbanded Hong Kong Alliance, which organized annual vigils for the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown until authorities banned the gatherings in 2020.
- International observers and human rights groups have condemned the sentences as an erosion of civil liberties and a suppression of historical memory.
A Hong Kong court has handed down prison sentences to three prominent activists who organized annual vigils commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown, marking one of the most significant applications of the city’s national security law. Lee Cheuk-yan, 69, and Chow Hang-tung, 41, were each sentenced to seven years in prison after being convicted of inciting others to subvert state power. Albert Ho, 74, who pleaded guilty earlier this year, received a five-year sentence. The rulings effectively close a chapter on public commemoration in the territory, where such gatherings were once among the few permitted spaces for discussing the sensitive historical event.
The defendants were key figures in the Hong Kong Alliance, an organization founded in 1989 to support pro-democracy movements and hold yearly candlelit vigils in Victoria Park. For more than three decades, these events drew tens of thousands of participants, with organizers claiming turnouts exceeding 100,000 people, although police estimates were often lower. The Alliance disbanded in 2021 following increased pressure from authorities after the implementation of the national security law. That legislation, imposed by Beijing in 2020, criminalizes a broad range of dissenting acts and has been cited by officials as necessary for maintaining stability after widespread anti-government protests in 2019.
The prosecution centered on the activists’ use of specific slogans and their role in planning the vigils. The court determined that Lee and Chow had incited others to engage in unlawful acts aimed at subverting state power, specifically noting their intent to undermine confidence in the Chinese Communist Party through division and hostility. The defense argued that the Alliance was merely exercising freedom of speech and that the long-standing demonstrations had previously operated with police permission. A supporter noted the abrupt shift in legal interpretation, observing that activities tolerated for over 35 years were suddenly reclassified as subversive.
Chow Hang-tung, a barrister educated in the United Kingdom, represented herself throughout the trial. She has been in detention since 2021 and continued to communicate from prison, including writing letters published on social media platforms. Before her arrest, Chow stated she was prepared to face imprisonment as part of her commitment to democratic principles. In August, she wrote to UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham, urging a stronger British response to what she described as the growing threat from an aggressive China. The UK Foreign Office subsequently condemned the use of the national security law in convicting the activists.
The sentencing drew significant public attention, with supporters queuing for days to secure seats in the courtroom. Some attendees prepared food and umbrellas, anticipating long waits overnight. Elizabeth Tang, Lee Cheuk-yan’s wife, expressed disbelief at the outcome, recalling how previous Alliance activities were routinely approved by police. She described the current atmosphere of silence as frightening and unjust, emphasizing that the vigils had been a defining feature of Hong Kong’s distinct identity. The court also imposed a fine of 1.5 million Hong Kong dollars on the disbanded Hong Kong Alliance.
Authorities maintain that the national security law targets only a small number of individuals responsible for violence and disorder, arguing it is essential for restoring order. Critics, however, contend that the law has fundamentally transformed the city’s political landscape, eroding autonomy and creating a climate of fear. Human rights organizations have widely condemned the sentences. Amnesty International described the verdicts as a triple tragedy, affecting not only the activists but also survivors of the 1989 crackdown and future generations denied the opportunity to discuss this pivotal moment in modern Chinese history.
The case highlights the broader suppression of historical memory in Chinese territory. Hong Kong and Macau were previously the only places where public vigils for the Tiananmen Square victims were permitted. Estimates of the death toll from the 1989 crackdown vary widely, ranging from hundreds to thousands, but the topic remains heavily censored on the mainland. In recent years, activists who attempted to mark the anniversary faced surveillance, searches, and detention by plainclothes police. The banning of the vigils in 2020, initially justified by pandemic-related restrictions, signaled a permanent shift in what constitutes permissible public expression.
International reactions have been swift and critical. Foreign governments and rights groups view the convictions as evidence of Beijing’s tightening grip on Hong Kong’s civil society. The case represents one of the last high-profile national security trials to proceed in the city, illustrating how the legal framework introduced in 2020 has extinguished what was once a globally watched pro-democracy struggle. As the activists begin their sentences, the absence of public commemoration underscores the profound changes in Hong Kong’s social and political fabric.
The practical significance of these rulings extends beyond the individuals involved. They serve as a deterrent to other potential organizers and signal that even non-violent historical remembrance is now subject to severe legal penalties. The disparity between past police permissions for similar events and current convictions highlights the arbitrary nature of the new legal standards. For residents, the loss of this annual gathering removes a rare outlet for collective mourning and political expression, leaving a void in the city’s public sphere.
What comes next remains uncertain, but the precedent set by these sentences suggests further restrictions on dissent. The disbanding of the Hong Kong Alliance and the imprisonment of its leaders indicate that organized opposition to Beijing’s policies faces insurmountable legal hurdles. While some activists may continue to operate underground or through digital channels, the risk of detention looms large. The international community continues to monitor the situation, with diplomatic pressure likely to persist as concerns over human rights and autonomy in Hong Kong deepen.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- BBC News↗Hong Kong's Tiananmen activists sentenced to up to seven years in prison
- The Guardian US↗Tiananmen Square vigil organisers jailed for seven years in Hong Kong
