Hong Kong court must not ‘pay lip service’ to human rights, lawyer tells trial of Tiananmen vigil activists

“A defence lawyer for a Tiananmen vigil activist has urged a Hong Kong court not to “pay lip service” to human rights protections, arguing that calls to “end one-party rule” in China should be considered legitimate political expressions. Alliance leaders (from left) Lee Cheuk-yan, Chow Hang-tung, and Albert Ho appear on the giant screen at Hong Kong’s annual Tiananmen crackdown vigil on June 4, 2019. File photo: Todd R. Darling/HKFP. Barrister Erik Shum, representing Lee Cheuk-yan, spoke before a three-judge panel on Monday as closing arguments began in the national security trial of Lee and Chow Hang-tung. Both are former leaders of the now-defunct Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China. The pair and the Alliance are facing a charge of “inciting subversion,” an offence under the Beijing-imposed national security law, over the group’s calls to end one-party rule in China during decades of candlelight vigils commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown. The offence carries a maximum penalty of 10 years behind bars. The calls to end one-party rule – one of the group’s five tenets that also included the democratisation of China since its founding in 1989 – were demanding a change in the country’s political system rather than targeting any specific political party, Shum said. Shum told the court on Monday that prosecutors had failed to present evidence that the Alliance sought to incite the public to revolt against the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The Alliance had never proposed an “action plan” to mobilise supporters to topple the CCP, he added. “In the past 30 years, there has been no evidence showing that any person acted under the Alliance’s specific instruction,” Shum said in Cantonese. Civilian political criticism Prosecutors have argued that there are no “lawful means” to end CCP rule after a 2018 constitutional amendment stipulates that the party’s leadership is the “defining feature” of China’s socialist system. Shum argued on Monday that prosecutors presented a “tautological theory.” “We ask: How exactly did the Alliance incite others to overthrow the CCP? And my submission is that the prosecution has always reverted to the claim that ending CCP rule is illegal,” Shum said. From left: Lee Cheuk-yan, Albert Ho, Chow Hang-tung. Photos: HKFP. Shum urged the court to draw a boundary for what is considered an acceptable political expression and what is not. “The court must not pay lip service to human rights protections,” he said. Judge Alex Lee, one of the three national security judges presiding over the trial, asked Shum to elaborate on how higher courts interpreted illegal means in the landmark “Hong Kong 47” case , in which 45 pro-democracy campaigners were found guilty of subversion. Shum argued that the case revolved around the group’s plan to indiscriminately veto the government budget once they were elected as lawmakers, which was ruled a breach of duty and an abuse of power. The Alliance, however, was not exercising any power, and its calls should be considered civilian political criticism, Shum said. “On this side of the spectrum is dissatisfaction with the status quo. Is that not allowed to be said?” he said. ‘Freedom is not absolute’ Also delivering closing arguments on Monday, lead prosecutor Ned Lai said the Alliance’s calls should be interpreted as toppling China’s “fundamental system” and the country’s central political bodies. Lai argued the Alliance’s calls had exceeded the legitimate boundary of freedom of expression as the defendants intended to stoke hatred against Beijing. “We say that their behaviour had crossed the line,” he said in Cantonese. “Freedom is not absolute.” A Correctional Service Department vehicle arrives at the West Kowloon Law Courts Building on January 22, 2026. Photo: Kyle Lam/HKFP. The prosecutor also said the defendants’ advocacy for democratisation was irrelevant to the case as their calls amounted to a breach of the law. Judge Lee appeared skeptical of Lai’s submission, saying that the court may have to consider whether the defendants “genuinely believed” that their behaviour was lawful. Chow, a barrister representing herself in the trial, is set to deliver her closing arguments on Tuesday. For decades, the Alliance organised vigils at Victoria Park to commemorate the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown in Beijing, when hundreds, perhaps thousands, were killed as troops dispersed pro-democracy demonstrators in and around Tiananmen Square. The Alliance disbanded in 2021 after authorities banned the vigil for two years, citing Covid-19 restrictions, and arrested its leadership on national security allegations. Chow and Lee have been behind bars since September 2021. A third defendant, former lawmaker Albert Ho, was excused from attending the rest of the proceedings after pleading guilty when the trial opened in January.

Summary generated from the RSS feed of HKFP. All article rights belong to the original publisher. Click through to read the full piece on hongkongfp.com.