Hong Kong Court Convicts Tiananmen Vigil Organisers Under National Security Law

Pro-democracy activists Lee Cheuk-yan, Cheung Man-kwong, and Chow Hang-tung were previously photographed at a 2019 vigil for the victims of the Tiananmen Square massacre by Tyrone Siu of Reuters. Two prominent Hong Kong activists who helped organise annual vigils commemorating China’s deadly 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown have now been convicted of inciting subversion under the city’s national security law.

On Friday, Hong Kong’s High Court found former legislator Lee Cheuk-yan, 69, and lawyer Chow Hang-tung, 41, guilty of what is one of the most serious offences under the sweeping security law imposed by Beijing in 2020. The pair, who pleaded not guilty to inciting subversion, have been held in detention since they were charged in September 2021. They face up to 10 years in prison, with sentencing scheduled for a later date.

A third defendant, veteran activist Albert Ho, 74, pleaded guilty before the trial began. This case stands as one of Hong Kong’s highest-profile prosecutions under the national security law, renewing international scrutiny over the erosion of political freedoms as Beijing expands its influence in the territory.

Who are Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung?

Lee and Chow were leading members of the now-disbanded pro-democracy action group Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China. For decades, this alliance organised Hong Kong’s annual candlelight vigil commemorating those killed in the Tiananmen crackdown.

The alliance was established in May 1989 as protests calling for political reform in China gathered momentum in Beijing and other cities. Over the following three decades, it campaigned for accountability over the brutal crackdown on protests, the release of political dissidents, and democratic reform in China.

Lee, a former Hong Kong politician and veteran labour activist, served as the alliance’s chairman, while Chow, a barrister, acted as its vice chairwoman. Prosecutors accused the alliance and its leaders of inciting others to subvert state power, pointing specifically to the organization’s longstanding slogan calling to “end one-party” rule in China. The court ruled that this slogan sought to instigate hostility towards the Chinese Communist Party and undermine the political system established under China’s constitution.

Lee and Chow maintained that their political advocacy was entirely peaceful and protected by Hong Kong’s guarantees of freedom of expression. Nevertheless, both were convicted on Friday, joining Albert Ho who had already pleaded guilty to the same charge.

What happened to Hong Kong’s Tiananmen vigils?

Hong Kong was previously one of the few places under Chinese sovereignty where large public commemorations of the Tiananmen crackdown were permitted. On June 4, 1989, Chinese troops opened fire on demonstrators after weeks of largely peaceful protests centered around Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, calling for political reform. Hundreds—and possibly thousands—of people were killed, with thousands more arrested.

While public discussion and commemoration of the crackdown have long been heavily censored in mainland China, Hong Kong maintained a different status under the “one country, two systems” arrangement established when Britain handed the territory back to China in 1997. Every June 4, crowds gathered in Victoria Park for a candlelight vigil commemorating those killed and demanding accountability from Beijing.

At their peak, these commemorations drew crowds numbering in the tens of thousands. The last major vigil organised by the alliance took place in 2019, marking the 30th anniversary of the crackdown. Authorities subsequently banned the gatherings in 2020 and 2021, initially citing COVID-19 restrictions, and they have not resumed since.

What is Hong Kong’s national security law?

The cessation of the vigils coincided with a broader political transformation in Hong Kong following months of mass antigovernment and pro-democracy protests in 2019. In June 2020, Beijing imposed a new national security law in Hong Kong, criminalising secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion with foreign forces.

While Chinese and Hong Kong authorities stated the legislation was necessary to restore stability and protect rights and freedoms following the 2019 unrest, human rights groups argue otherwise. Critics maintain that the law's broad provisions have dismantled Hong Kong’s organized political opposition and restricted individual freedoms that once distinguished the territory from the mainland. Since its introduction, leading opposition figures have faced prosecution, civil society groups have disbanded, and independent media outlets have closed.

Why is this case so controversial?

Rights groups argue that the prosecution of Lee and Chow effectively criminalises peaceful political advocacy and the remembrance of a critical chapter in modern Chinese history. Reacting to the Friday verdict, Amnesty International Hong Kong Overseas spokesperson Fernando Cheung stated that the national security law is being used to punish individuals for peacefully remembering the Tiananmen crackdown.

Amnesty International Deputy Regional Director Sarah Brooks described Lee and Chow as “prisoners of conscience” who should never have faced prosecution, calling for their immediate and unconditional release.