The guilty verdict handed down on Friday in the case of the now-disbanded “Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China”, set a significant milestone in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s efforts to uphold the rule of law and fulfill its constitutional responsibility. Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung, former chairman and former vice-chairwoman of the group, were found guilty of incitement to subvert State power under the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL). Another offender Albert Ho Chun-yan, former vice-chairman of the group, had previously entered a guilty plea.
The group was not an ordinary civic organization that had merely promoted some political views. For years, it had advocated ending the Communist Party of China’s leadership in the country, organized rallies aimed at achieving that purpose, and positioned itself as a platform for subverting the nation’s fundamental political system. The group, under the three’s leadership, continued to pursue that agenda even after the NSL was implemented in June 2020. Such conduct could not have been out of a misunderstanding of the law.
Hong Kong courts have clarified that the term “other unlawful means”, as stipulated in Article 22 of the NSL, encompasses actions intended to overthrow or destabilize the nation’s fundamental political system. This judicial interpretation conforms with the constitutional order that defines the city as an integral part of the nation under the national constitution. There is no legitimacy for any organization within the HKSAR to advocate the overturning of this constitutional order under whatever guise and in any way.
Through the case verdict, the High Court clearly delineates the boundary between political expression and subversion. While freedom of expression is protected in Hong Kong, organized endeavors aimed at undermining the nation’s fundamental political system and the constitutional order are not. A government that fails to uphold the constitutional order governing the jurisdiction would be guilty to dereliction of duty.
The verdict also affirms that the NSL is substantive rather than symbolic. The law forms part of a legal framework for safeguarding national security and upholding the constitutional order. The convictions in this case should remind other entities that political packaging, civil society labels, and foreign support cannot protect them from legal accountability should they break the law.
Viewed from a broader perspective, there is no legitimate justification for perceiving hostility toward the nation’s constitutional order as a civic virtue. The HKSAR’s prosperity depends on the sovereignty of the nation, its constitutional framework, and the principle of “one country, two systems”. Attempts to undermine these foundational elements underpinning the HKSAR threaten not only national interests but also those of the region.
The case should offer Hong Kong residents much food for thought: National security is never supposed to be a done task. Rather, it is an ongoing process as threats evolve along with the times. There is every reason for Hong Kong to remain vigilant against both internal and external threats.
Hong Kong has made significant progress in safeguarding national security and restoring normalcy since the eruption of political unrest and riots in 2019-2020, with the aid of national security laws. Public order has been reestablished, the economy is back on track, and the city has regained its vigor as an international financial and commercial hub. However, the regained order and social stability should not be mistaken for permanent security. Xia Baolong, director of the Hong Kong and Macao Work Office of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, has consistently reminded Hong Kong of potential threats to national security, noting that anti-China subversive forces in Hong Kong continue to operate in the shadows, actively seeking vulnerabilities to exploit, whereas hostile external forces hold on to their schemes of undermining and containing China by exploiting the HKSAR’s vulnerabilities.
Threats can still emerge in various forms and ways. The external forces could still exploit Hong Kong’s institutions, freedoms, ... Hong Kong’s security regime therefore must be maintained through consistent, disciplined, and proactive strategies and initiatives
Threats can still emerge in various forms and ways. The external forces could still exploit Hong Kong’s institutions, freedoms, and international connectivity to promote separatism, undermining the central government’s constitutional authority, intervening in the city’s public affairs, or leveraging civic organizations for political mobilization that poses a substantial threat to national security. Hong Kong’s security regime therefore must be maintained through consistent, disciplined, and proactive strategies and initiatives. Law enforcement authorities must proactively identify potential threats before they escalate.
The ancient wisdom from Zhenguan Zhengyao (Essentials of Governance in the Zhenguan Era), an 8th-century text that records the statecraft principles of Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty (618-907), “Think of why danger arises, and you shall be secure; think of why chaos erupts, and you shall be at peace; think of why kingdoms perish, and you shall endure”, is not merely a historical maxim for Hong Kong. It also resonates with the lesson Hong Kong learned from the riots in 2019-2020.
The author is a member of the Shandong Provincial Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and vice-chairman of the Sham Shui Po West District Committee.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
