Global outcry as Hong Kong jails 45 pro-democracy activists

Forty-five pro-democracy activists, journalists and ex-lawmakers were sentenced to prison terms of four to 10 years on Tuesday in Hong Kong’s largest national security trial. The case, rooted in their participation in a 2020 unofficial primary election, has drawn international condemnation and raised fresh concerns about the erosion of civil liberties in the once semi-autonomous city.

Driving the news: The activists were convicted of “conspiracy to commit subversion” under the Beijing-imposed 2020 national security law for organizing a primary election intended to win a legislative majority and disrupt government operations. Legal scholar Benny Tai, 60, deemed the “mastermind,” received the harshest prison sentence of 10 years. Former student leader Joshua Wong was sentenced to four years and eight months, while journalist-turned-activist Gwyneth Ho was handed seven years. Two people in the same case were acquitted in May. Judges ruled that the primary posed a subversive threat, despite its resemblance to legitimate political activity in democracies worldwide.
International outcry: Human rights groups and Western governments denounced the sentences as a blatant attack on political freedoms. The U.S. called the case “aggressive prosecution” for peaceful activities protected under Hong Kong’s Basic Law, while U.K. and Australian officials condemned the use of the law to stifle dissent. Former Hong Kong Gov. Chris Patten described the sentencing as a “sham,” while Human Rights Watch highlighted the erosion of the city’s civil liberties and judicial independence. Beijing, however, dismissed criticism, asserting that the law ensures national security and stability.
The big picture: The trial underscores Beijing’s tightening grip on Hong Kong following the city’s famous 2019 protests, symbolizing the dismantling of its once-thriving pro-democracy movement. Critics argue the national security law undermines judicial independence and betrays promises of autonomy under the “one country, two systems” framework, which was promised during Hong Kong’s 1997 handover. For many, the case marked the transformation of the city’s political leaders into prisoners of conscience and reinforced fears that dissent has no place in the city’s future governance.

Share this Article