Judge questions relevance of 2019 protest remarks in nat. sec case against Tiananmen vigil activists

2026-01-30 - 12:08

A judge presiding over a national security trial against Tiananmen vigil activists has questioned why their remarks about anti-extradition protests six years ago were relevant to the prosecution’s case. The annual vigil at Victoria Park on June 4, 2020, commemorates victims of the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. Photo: May James/HKFP. Prosecutors are seeking to prove that Tiananmen vigil activists Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung continued to advocate an end to one-party rule in mainland China after the national security law came into effect in June 2020. Alex Lee, one of the three judges adjudicating the landmark national security trial, cast doubt on whether videos of the activists’ remarks on the 2019 protest movement shown to the court on Friday were relevant to the prosecution’s argument. Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow once led the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, a group that organised candlelight vigils to mark the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown in Beijing. The pair are standing trial for inciting subversion under the Beijing-imposed national security law – an offence that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. A third defendant, Albert Ho, pleaded guilty when the trial opened last week. The Alliance itself stands accused of the same charge. At the West Kowloon Law Courts on Friday, prosecutor Ivan Cheung played videos of Lee Cheuk-yan appearing at press conferences, in interviews, and at a US congressional hearing in which he said he, along with the Alliance, would continue its work even after Beijing enacted its national security law in Hong Kong. In one video, the activist was shown speaking to the press, addressing questions as to whether he was worried about holding vigils under the national security law. “Our slogan is not allowed and may be an offence,” he said, referring to the Alliance’s call for abolishing one-party rule. “But we will continue and see, come what may.” ‘Needle in a haystack’ The prosecution also played a clip in which members of the Alliance, including Lee and Chow, shouted: “Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong” — a slogan widely adopted by the pro-democracy camp during the 2019 protests and unrest. A heavy police presence outside the West Kowloon Law Courts Building on January 22, 2026. Photo: Kyle Lam/HKFP. But Judge Lee asked for the video to be paused and said: “I cannot see how the anti-extradition protests are relevant to this case.” He added, “Is this a good use of the court’s time?” Cheung replied that the prosecution had submitted that the Alliance sought to take advantage of “current events” to incite people to subvert state power. The judge said the prosecution had to be specific; otherwise, making sense of the evidence would be like “searching for a needle in a haystack.” The video also showed Lee Cheuk-yan saying that he and other Alliance members would light candles in Victoria Park on June 4, 2020, despite a ban on the vigil due to Covid-19 social distancing measures. He also called on people to hold their own individual vigils. The court was also shown a 2020 video of the activist and other Alliance members sitting on the ground in Victoria Park, where the vigils were held, lighting candles. In one instance, he recalled the jailing of Liu Xiaobo, a Chinese rights activist who was sentenced to 11 years in prison over Charter 08, a manifesto he signed along with more than 300 dissidents calling for an end to one-party rule. “Demands as basic as these could only be seen as a subversion of state power under one-party rule,” he said. “As Hongkongers, we should hold on to freedom of speech and never give up.” In another video, Ho was shown criticising the national security law, describing the powers of a high-level national security agency and what he called the legislation’s “moving goalposts.” But the judge again stopped the video, saying that the activists were not being prosecuted for opposing the security law. The court was also shown a July 2020 video of Lee Cheuk-yan telling a US congressional hearing via conference call that the Alliance would “hold on to [its] principles and will not retreat,” even after the national security law took effect. Also present in the call were ex-lawmaker Nathan Law, now overseas and wanted by the Hong Kong authorities, and Brian Leung, an activist who stormed the Legislative Council and read out the 2019 protest movement’s five demands. Judge Lee again asked to skip their speeches after the prosecution said the activists’ testimonies would serve as “context” for the current case.