Pro-democracy icons sentenced to decades in prison

A Hong Kong court has sentenced key pro-democracy figures to years in prison for subversion, following a controversial national security trial.

Activists Benny Tai and Joshua Wong were among the group known as Hong Kong 47 who were convicted. Tai received 10 years in prison while Wong received more than four years in prison for planning to select opposition candidates for local elections.

A total of 47 activists, opposition lawmakers and ordinary people were charged with organizing or participating in the scheme. Most were convicted of conspiracy to overthrow, while two were acquitted.

Their trial marks the harshest use of the national security law yet imposed by China on Hong Kong soon after pro-democracy protests erupted in the city in 2019.

Observers say it significantly weakens the city’s democracy movement and rule of law, and allows China to consolidate control of the city. The US described the trial as “politically motivated”.

The Beijing and Hong Kong governments say the law is necessary to maintain stability and deny it has undermined autonomy. They also said the conviction was a warning against forces trying to undermine China’s national security.

The case attracted huge interest from Hong Kong residents, with dozens of people lining up outside the court days before the verdict to get a spot in the public gallery.

Other prominent pro-democracy figures sentenced Tuesday include Gwyneth Ho, a former political journalist, and former lawmakers Claudia Mo and Leung Kwok-hung. They received sentences of four to seven years in prison.

In 2020, hundreds of thousands of Hong Kongers voted in the unofficial primary for the Legislative Council election. It was organized by pro-democracy activists to increase the opposition’s chances of blocking pro-Beijing government bills.

The activists argued that their actions were legal. But officials accused the activists of trying to “overthrow” the government, and judges in their ruling agreed with the prosecution’s argument that the plan would create a crisis constitution.