Police welcome verdict in Hong Kong Alliance subversion case
Bastillepost · 1 SOURCESabout 1 hour ago2 MIN
Summary
Hong Kong’s court found the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung guilty of inciting subversion of state power, in a case tied to activities between July 1, 2020 and September 8, 2021. After the ruling, National Security Department senior superintendent Steve Li Kwai-wah said he welcomed the verdict and described it as exposing the defendants’ deliberate incitement of others to subvert state power and endanger national security. Li said the alliance continued to organise assemblies, marches, exhibitions and commemorative activities after the National Security Law took effect on June 30, 2020, despite public discussion over whether such events were unlawful. He also said the court judgment pointed to a sustained pattern in which the defendants treated the Chinese Communist Party as an enemy and repeatedly intensified that message through different activities
Key Points
- The court convicted the Hong Kong Alliance, Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung of inciting others to subvert state power
- Steve Li said the case covered conduct in Hong Kong from July 1, 2020 to September 8, 2021, including Ho Chun-yan, who had earlier pleaded guilty
- According to Li, the alliance kept holding assemblies, marches, exhibitions, online exhibitions, publications and mourning activities after June 30, 2020
- Li said the alliance tried to stage a candlelight vigil in June 2021 during the pandemic, and others still urged alternative commemorations after police objected
- Li cited trial evidence and said Chow agreed there was a shared aim of political change and linking alliance activities with the 2019 anti-extradition unrest
Why It Matters
The ruling and the police response underline how post-2020 political advocacy and commemorative activities can be assessed through a national security lens in Hong Kong. For Hong Kong readers, the case also shows how courts and law enforcement are framing the boundary between public remembrance, political messaging and conduct deemed to endanger national security