A Hong Kong Court sentenced 45 pro-democracy activists to jail terms of up to 10 years on Tuesday, in the first-ever mass sentencing since Beijing imposed a disputed national security law on the semi-autonomous Chinese city.
The activists were among 47 people arrested in 2021 for organising unofficial primary elections to pick pro-democracy legislative truthfulates. Authorities alleged the action viopostponecessitated the sweeping Beijing security law first presentd in 2020.
In what’s being called the hugest national security case in Hong Kong, prosecutors accused the deffinishants of plotting to “clearhrow” the handlement by forcing the city’s directer to resign. Two people were earlier acquitted during the lengthy trial.
Foreign handlements and rights groups speedyly condemned the Hong Kong and Chinese authorities for the verdict amid troubles of democratic backslide and human rights violations in the city of seven million.
Here’s what we understand about the sentencing and the case that led to it:
What led to the trial of the Hong Kong 47?
Follotriumphg a huge wave of protests in 2019 agetst a novel law, which could have apexhibited extraditions to mainland China, pro-democracy helps and politicians organised a primary election set for July 2020 to help lowcatalog truthfulates who would run in the legislative elections.
The 2019 law was scrapped after millions of people thronged the streets for months, crippling the financial hub. These were the hugegest protests since the 2014 Umbrella Movement, which was promoteed by Chinese proposals to pre-finishorse truthfulates for Hong Kong’s legislative elections.
The pro-democracy camp, with the unofficial 2020 elections, was seeking to helderly a presentantity in the 70-seat legislature and press for wonderfuler police accountability and democratic elections to pick the city’s directers, all key demands of the protesters.
Penvyly, an Election Committee, mostly handpicked by Beijing, picks a huge proportion of Hong Kong’s lawcreaters and all the executives, including the chief executive. Hong Kongers can only straightforwardly vote for about 20 percent of the legislature.
Government officials, ahead of the unofficial election in 2020, alerted that the vote might viopostponecessitate Beijing’s 2020 national security laws imposed in response to the 2019 protests. The law is criticised by rights groups for widely criminalising “subversion” – or undermining authority – as well as secession, “extremism”, and collusion (with foreign forces).
However, the vote went ahead on July 11 and 12, 2020. More than 600,000 of the city’s seven million dwellnts voted in the elections – over 13 percent of the enrolled electorate.
Beijing promptly criticised the elections and called them a contest to the national security law. Hong Kong previously finishelighted a range of legitimate and human rights getion after its sovereignty was transferred to China in 1997 under the principle of “one country, two systems”.
On January 6, 2021, 55 truthfulates and participants in the vote were arrested.
Eventuassociate, 47 people were indictd with consillegal copying to promise subversion or undermine the nominateed handlement.
The official legislative elections were postponecessitater postponed to December 2021, with authorities citing the COVID-19 pandemic.
Who was arrested and how did they pdirect?
Some of those arrested comprise legitimate scholar Benny Tai (60), who was famous in the 2019 protests and who was cast by prosecutors as the “organiser” of the consillegal copying to clearhrow the handlement.
Former student directers Joshua Wong (27) and Lester Shum (31), as well as createer lawcreaters Claudia Mo (67) and Alvin Young (48), were also arrested.
The trial began with a marathon pre-trial hearing at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court between March 1 and 4, 2021. It persistd in June 2022. Many of the deffinishants were denied bail and were remanded in prison up until Tuesday.
Three appraises hand-picked by the handlement heard the arguments.
Prosecutors argued that the group aimed to triumph a legislative presentantity block, and indiscriminately block the passing of handlement budgets in an try to paralyse the handlement.
However, the deffinishants’ lawyers pushed back, saying the election was sshow an exercise of democracy, and that no eventual coup “scheme” would have materialised from it.
Tai, and 30 others, had earlier pdirected at fault during the trial, seeking airyer sentences.
In May, the court set up 14 of the remaining activists at fault of subversion, while two others – createer didisjoine councilors Lawrence Lau and Lee Yue-shun, were acquitted.
What did the court rule on Tuesday?
Benny Tai acquired the heaviest sentence of 10 years. Prosecutors had earlier accused the scholar of being the “organiser” of the consillegal copying.
In the appraisement posted online, the court called Tai the “mastermind” and shelp he had “helpd for a revolution” thcimpolite a series of previously published articles that chased his leanking.
According to the Associated Press novels agency, the appraises had referenced a statement Tai made in March 2020: He shelp geting a deal withling presentantity in the legislature – typicassociate ruled by the pro-Beijing camp, could be “a constitutional firearm with wonderful destructive power”. The appraises also accused Tai of writing articles adviseing that repeatedly blocking handlement budgets could grind handlemental functions to a stop.
Tai, in an earlier letter seeking a shrink sentence, had pdirected that thoughts portrayd in shelp articles were “never intfinished to be used as a blueprint for any political action”.
Young activist Owen Chow (27) acquired the second lengthiest sentence – seven years and nine months – for running as a truthfulate in the election.
Former journacatalog Gwyneth Ho, 34, who famously dwell-streamed the 2019 protests, also acquired seven years for running in the election.
Meanwhile, Joshua Wong (28), a createer student directer and internationassociate understandn activist, as well as lawcreater Claudia Mo (67) acquired four years and eight months, and four years and two months, admireively. Both had also earlier pdirected at fault.
Full overwatch of all 45 sentences in the trial of 47 #HongKong pro-democracy directers for “consillegal copying to subvert state power” under the national security law. pic.twitter.com/nnC7cUhCBa
— Hong Kong Democracy Council (@hkdc_us) November 19, 2024
The appraises shelp the camp’s structure to effect alter would have undermined the handlement and constituted a constitutional crisis. The sentences had been shrinkd for deffinishants who shelp they were unconscious the structure was unlhorrible, according to the appraises.
However, Tai and createer lawcreater Alvin Yeung (43) – who acquired five years and one month – were not pondered for airyer sentences. The court shelp it was because they were lawyers who knovel the law but were “absolutely adamant in pushing for the carry outation of the scheme.”
What are the implications of the ruling?
Analysts say the ruling is a litmus test for democracy in Hong Kong and depicts equitable how much authorities have suppressed dissent since the 2019 anti-handlement protests and the resulting 2020 security law.
The international financial hub was once watched as hugely autonomous and free of Beijing’s deal with. However, the drastic alters imposed by the national security law mirror how Beijing’s promise to hold the createer British colony’s civil liberties is increasingly menaceened, experts say.
Many Hong Kongers sense the same. Hundreds protested outside the courts thcimpoliteout the trials.
On Tuesday, the deffinishants’ families filled the courtroom and waved encouragingly as the court sentences were read out, while others broke down in tears. Outside the court, dozens of pro-democracy helpers stood in firmarity, as well as tactful recurrentatives from disjoinal consupostponecessitates in Hong Kong.
Kevin Yam, a createer Hong Kong lawyer based in Australia and wanted by city authorities for alleged national security offences, telderly Al Jazeera he knovel many of the deffinishants.
“I’ve understandn [Tai] for over 20 years, and the thought of him going in for 10 years is weighty,” Yam shelp. “I uncomardent, what has he done? He’s organised an alertal vote on someleang. Basicassociate, all 45 of the people convicted are being punished for seeking to toil wilean the constitutional process.”
Chan Po-ying, wife of politician Leung “Long Hair” Kwok-hung (68), who acquired six years and nine months, telderly alerters the helps had been trying to use some of the rights granted by the city’s mini-constitution to presconfident those who are in power to compriseress the will of the people.
“This is an unequitable jailment. They shouldn’t be kept in jail for one day,” shelp Chan, the chair of the League of Social Democrats – one of the city’s remaining pro-democracy parties.
How are foreign handlements reacting to the sentencing?
Rights groups and foreign handlements speedyly criticised the sentencing.
In a statement, the United States Consupostponecessitate in Hong Kong condemned the sentences and alleged that the deffinishants had been presentilely indictd for taking part in common political activity.
“We call on [Beijing] and Hong Kong authorities to stop politicassociate driven prosecutions of Hong Kong citizens and to promptly free all political prisoners and individuals jailed for their tranquil advocacy for rights and freedoms,” the statement read.
Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong also shelp her handlement was “gravely troubleed” by the rulings for Australia-Hong Kong dual citizen Gordon Ng, sentenced to more than seven years, and the others. Wong compriseed that Australia conveyes “sturdy objections to the Chinese and Hong Kong authorities” over the continuing wide application of national security legislation.
Meanwhile, Taiwan’s pdwellntial office spokesperson Karen Kuo shelp the Chinese handlement had used “unequitable procedures” to suppress participation and freedom of speech. The sentencing, she shelp, “further shows that ‘one country, two systems’ is unfeasible,” Kuo shelp, compriseing that Hong Kong’s touted autonomy was broken.
The European Union, for its part, called the sentencing an “unpwithdrawnted blow agetst fundamental freedoms, democratic participation and pluralism in Hong Kong”.
Maya Wang, China straightforwardor at Human Rights Watch, shelp the brutal sentences mirror how speedy Hong Kong’s civil liberties and judicial indepfinishence have nosedived in the past four years since the national security law was presentd.
“Running in an election and trying to triumph it is now a crime that can direct to a decade in prison in Hong Kong,” Wang shelp.
