Legal process seen to take its course with landmark Hong Kong verdicts
- After 14 defendants are found guilty of subversion and two acquitted under the national security law, Hong Kong judges have explained in detail the reasoning behind their decisions
The arrest of 47 opposition politicians and activists in January 2021 on suspicion of plotting to subvert state power marked a turning point for Hong Kong. It demonstrated that the new national security law, passed by Beijing in response to civil unrest in 2019, had to be taken seriously and that far-reaching changes to the city’s political system were on the way.
The legal process, including a 118-day trial, has taken more than three years. And it is not over yet.
But the verdicts delivered on Thursday on 16 defendants who pleaded not guilty should mark the beginning of the end.
Three judges found 14 of them guilty of subversion under the national security law. Two were acquitted.
The opposition figures were found to have joined an unlawful scheme, along with 31 who pleaded guilty, to win a majority in the Legislative Council and indiscriminately vote down the government’s budget. This was described as “a lethal constitutional weapon”.
An unofficial “primary” poll to select candidates for an expected election in 2020 was part of that process. The aim of the plot, the judges said, was to paralyse the government, force the resignation of the chief executive and spark a constitutional crisis, undermining the city’s political system.
They ruled this amounted to a conspiracy to subvert state power.
People with different political opinions have conflicting perspectives on the case. Some foreign governments and international human rights organisations have condemned the verdicts.
Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu and Secretary for Security Chris Tang Ping-keung defended them. But whatever view is held, there can be no doubt the legal process has taken its course.
The judges assessed the evidence, hearing the testimony of 10 of the defendants and applied the law. Their judgment, running to 318 pages, explained their reasoning in detail.
They made findings which will provide greater understanding of the law, including establishing the elements of the offence, providing definitions of terms, and ruling that guilt requires an intention to subvert state power.
The two acquittals are the first under the national security law. The judges paid careful attention to both the facts of the case and the law.
Sentences will not be imposed until a later date. The government intends to challenge the acquittals and defendants are also likely to appeal.
The long legal process will continue.
The case is rooted in the anti-government protests of 2019 and their aftermath. As Tang said, it is “a sad story”.
The environment in Hong Kong has since changed dramatically. There will be more cases to come and others to conclude.
But the verdicts are a landmark – a step towards Hong Kong putting the past behind it and moving on.
