Can stability in Hong Kong come without sacrificing freedom?

In a landmark ruling, Hong Kong has found 14 pro-democracy activists guilty of subversion in violation of China’s National Security Law (NSL). Prominent individuals who took part in the 2019 major protests, including former MPs Leung Kwok-hung and Helena Wong, journalist-turned-campaigner Gwyneth Ho, and common people like nurse Winnie Yu, are among those found guilty.

The arguments

Beijing’s perspective and legal basis

The Chinese government maintains that the NSL has restored stability and order in Hong Kong following the chaotic 2019 protests. The law is viewed as critical to ensuring public safety and sustaining the rule of law.

The court highlighted solid evidence, such as letters and campaign materials, to indicate the activists’ aim to overthrow the government.

Three High Court judges, Andrew Chan, Alex Lee, and Johnny Chan, supported the prosecution’s claims, reiterating that actions that impede government operations must be condoned.

Criticism from rights groups

Many international observers also argue that the NSL is being used to restrict criticism and undermine the pro-democracy movement. They point to the nearly 100% conviction rate as proof of a biased legal system.

Family members of those convicted have spoken out against the punitive measures, calling them a betrayal of Hong Kong’s democratic ideals.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong of Australia, along with other global leaders, have decried the NSL’s broad application, claiming that it arbitrarily targets pro-democracy figures, the media, and civil society.

What’s the broader impact?

The trial has drawn attention to the decreasing space for political discord in Hong Kong. Legal experts and campaigners have warned that the NSL is undermining the city’s common law traditions and civil liberties.

Many convicted activists, notably social worker Hendrick Lui, were motivated by a desire to change society. Their imprisonment is viewed by advocates as a regrettable conclusion for people dedicated to public service and democratic ideals.

Activists who have fled Hong Kong have expressed deep emotional turmoil and guilt over leaving their peers behind to face severe penalties.

The facts

These convictions have sparked intense debate about the balance between maintaining order and preserving fundamental freedoms.

The 14 activists were part of a group of 47 charged with subversion for organizing an unofficial primary election in 2020, aimed at selecting candidates for the Legislative Council.

The court argued that if elected, these candidates would have created a “constitutional crisis” by attempting to veto government budgets, thus disrupting the functioning of the Hong Kong government.

Rights groups and several Western countries have condemned the verdict, labeling the prosecutions as politically motivated and a severe blow to democratic participation in Hong Kong.

The conviction of 14 pro-democracy activists under the National Security Law marks a turning point in Hong Kong’s recent history. It raises serious concerns about whether stability and order can be accomplished without jeopardising fundamental liberties and democratic values. As the city grapples with these concerns, the rest of the world pays close attention, debating the true cost of security and Hong Kong’s future liberty.