Justice may be delayed but never absent. On Friday, the rule of law and justice scored another victory. Three former leaders of the now-disbanded “Hong Kong Alliance” were sentenced to up to seven years and three months in jail under the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL) for inciting subversion of State power. In addition, the alliance was ordered to pay a HK$1.5 million fine ($191,254) in three months. This sends a stark reminder: Nobody is above the law in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and those who break the law must face the music.
The court found that the three defendants had incited public hatred toward the Communist Party of China (CPC) and advocated ending its leadership in the nation via various public events. In the earlier 216-page judgment, the court held that while it was not unlawful to organize commemorations, it was the defendants’ use of commemorative events to instigate supporters to take action to overthrow or undermine the CPC’s leadership that constituted subversion. As the CPC’s leadership was enshrined in the nation’s Constitution, any attempt to overthrow or undermine the Party’s leadership and the constitutional order of the nation constituted subversion under the NSL.
In their 19-page written ruling, the judges held that despite the defendants’ belief that their agenda might be in breach of the Constitution and the NSL, they pursued their course of conduct and strenuously promoted their agenda. This was “a premeditated act”, which showed that the defendants knowingly pursued the incitement to subversion with conspicuous alignment of their criminal intent and conduct with no reasonable excuse. As a result, it is beyond any dispute that the trio was convicted for incitement to subversion. Considering the defendants’ culpability, the guilty plea, the degree of remorsefulness among the different defendants, and the severity of the case, it warranted five to 10 years’ imprisonment under the two-tier sentencing regime of the NSL.
In fact, the group’s public advocacy and incitement of public hostility against the CPC through its subversive agenda was by no means new as it had persisted for many years since its establishment, and lasted even following the enactment of the NSL. The defendants reaped what they sowed, whereas the conviction and the consequential sentence meted out to them sent out a clear message: Acts inciting public hostility, hatred and disaffection toward the State with the objective of challenging the State power in breach of the Constitution and the NSL won’t be shielded from legal liability by the guise of “freedom of speech”.
The court ruling shows the line of demarcation between lawful exercise of freedom of speech and related rights and commission of incitement offenses against the NSL is clear. Freedom of speech and related rights are not absolute as under Article 19(3)(b) of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, they may be subject to restrictions by law for the protection of national security or of public order. An incitement offense involves a statement by the perpetrator with the criminal intent to incite criminal activities, overstepping the lawful boundary of free speech. The NSL (Articles 4 and 5) respects and protects human rights; and the principles of the rule of law are upheld in safeguarding national security in the HKSAR.
Incitement to subversion is an offense in many jurisdictions. As a matter of fact, both the pre-existing laws of the HKSAR (Crimes Ordinance (Cap. 200)) and the laws of other jurisdictions, like the United States and the United Kingdom, have similar provisions on incitement offenses. For example, the United States Code imposes a maximum penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment for incitement to subversion. As for the offense of treason, the maximum penalty in the UK is life imprisonment. All countries impose stiff sentences for incitement to subversion and other acts that severely endanger national security. Compared to other jurisdictions, the HKSAR’s national security regime is on par with the criminal jurisprudence in other jurisdictions.
The trial and sentencing of the alliance’s case exemplifies the transparency and due process of law, as the trial has been closely observed not only by local residents and the media but also by a number of foreign consular officials based in Hong Kong. The whole trial process was free from any external pressure and procedurally fair. The verdict, delivered in strict accordance with the law and based on evidence, underscores the professionalism, transparency and impartiality of Hong Kong’s legal system. Western criticisms of the case’s conviction and sentencing are politically driven and completely baseless.
No smear campaign or threat of sanctions can weaken Hong Kong’s resolve to defend the rule of law, a core value of the HKSAR and the cornerstone of its stability and prosperity. The conviction and sentencing of those involved in the case send a clear message: Everyone is equal before the law, and acts that cross the red line of the national security regime won’t be able to escape legal liability no matter how well they are sugarcoated by grandiloquent words.
The author is chairman of Y Legalites and a practicing solicitor in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
