Remarks by S for S on verdict of conviction in incitement to subversion case of "Hong Kong Alliance"
Following are the remarks by the Secretary for Security, Mr Tang Ping-keung, on verdict of conviction in incitement to subversion case of "Hong Kong Alliance" at a media session today (August 21):
Secretary for Security: The Court of First Instance delivered the verdict in the case concerning the "Hong Kong Alliance" (the Alliance), Lee Cheuk-yan, Ho Chun-yan and Chow Hang-tung, who were charged with "incitement to subversion of State power", contrary to Article 23 of the Hong Kong National Security Law (HKNSL).
The Alliance, Lee and Chow were convicted after trial, while Ho pleaded guilty earlier.
The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) considers that today's guilty verdict has enabled justice to be done.
The Alliance, since its establishment, has adopted so-called fundamental agendas and objectives to end the leadership of the Communist Party of China (the CPC) and overthrow the fundamental system of the People's Republic of China (the PRC) established by the Constitution.
We must all acknowledge that the Constitution is the fundamental law of the State.
Its Preamble makes it clear that the CPC leadership is the core and foundation of the constitutional order of the PRC.
The CPC and the PRC are an inalienable whole; no one shall attempt to overthrow the leadership of the CPC or undermine the fundamental system of the State. For the HKSAR, the Constitution is the most important component of our constitutional order, and is of paramount importance to "one country, two systems".
Article 22 of the HKNSL explicitly prohibits the overthrowing or undermining of PRC's fundamental system, or overthrowing PRC central power.
In this case, even after the HKNSL took effect, the defendants continued with various acts, including attempting to hold unauthorised assemblies, inciting the public through slogans and so-called resistance, publishing content, giving media interviews and speaking publicly, attempting to incite others to subvert State power, as well as overthrow or undermine the CPC leadership status by unlawful means, constituting the offence as stipulated in the HKNSL.
The court's reasons for verdict clearly state that the defendants were put on trial not because of their political views or beliefs. Neither did the charge involve any issue relating to democracy or criticism against the Central Government.
The court would only consider the laws and evidence relevant to the case to decide whether the prosecution is able to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt.
The Court stated that, amongst others, the Constitution and the Basic Law together establish the constitutional order of the HKSAR, including -
- "Leadership by the Communist Party of China" is the core of the fundamental and basic system established by the Constitution (Article 1 of the Constitution); and
- Chinese citizens must fulfil the obligations prescribed by the Constitution and the law (Article 33 of the Constitution).
It is beyond dispute that according to the Preamble and Article 1 of the Constitution, "the socialist system is the fundamental system of the People's Republic of China".
"Leadership by the Communist Party of China", being the defining feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics, is an integral element of the fundamental system of the country.
Under the Constitution, "overthrowing" or "undermining" the leadership status of the CPC is tantamount to "overthrowing" or "undermining" the fundamental and basic system established by the Constitution to which HKNSL 22 refers.
With reference to the "35+ subversion case", "other unlawful means" of "subversion" may include an act in breach of the provisions of the Constitution with a view to overthrowing or undermining the fundamental and basic system of the country whether or not such act involves violence or the threat of violence or other criminal acts.
When ordinary reasonable persons received the messages of the Alliance and other defendants, they must have understood that the aim of the agendas was to end the leadership by the CPC, and that other people were being encouraged to put the agendas into action.
The court also pointed out that the defendants had all along been hostile towards the CPC and the Central Government under its leadership, and adhered to the course of resisting the Central Government and refusing to make any compromise.
After the implementation of the HKNSL, even though the defendants knew that what they had said and done might have already gone beyond the scope of lawful freedom of expression, they paid no regard to it. The defendants intended to cause others to lose confidence in the CPC by stirring up hostility and causing division, so as to achieve the objective of undermining the fundamental system of the PRC.
Finally, I would like to reiterate that regarding any attempt to endanger national security, we will act in strict accordance with the principle of the rule of law, and never show leniency.
Thank you.
Reporter: There will be another major drill tomorrow at the Hong Kong Port Area of the new Huanggang Port. How is it different from previous drills, and what is the aim? Thank you.
Secretary for Security: For the drill at the Huanggang Port Hong Kong Port Area tomorrow, first of all, the number of participants will be 10 000, which doubles what we had last time. Also, this is the first time we will try to test the e-Channel regarding the "collaborative inspection and joint clearance". So this is the first time we are trying to do with some of the e-Channel machines. Also, for the "joint one-stop" vehicle lanes, we will try to test the running of the system. Although we may not be able to use the machine, we will test the procedure as to how it runs. I think that's the major difference.
Reporter: What is the message for Hong Kong people with today's verdict?
Secretary for Security: I think the message has been clearly spelled out by the court during the delivery of the judgment. First of all, the court's Reasons for Verdict clearly states that the defendants were put on trial not because of their political wills or beliefs. A lot of people try to make an excuse that they are not doing any illegal act, but they just try to express their will. I think the first point made by the court makes it very clear that it has nothing to do with their political wills and beliefs. It's all because of evidence and law.
And also, I think the judgment states very clearly that it is beyond dispute that according to the Preamble and Article 1 of the Constitution, the socialist system is the fundamental system of the People's Republic of China, and leadership by the CPC, being the defining feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics, is an integral element of the fundamental system of the country. The court also points out very clearly that the defendants had all along been hostle towards the CPC and the Central Government under its leadership and adhered to the cause of resisting the Central Government and refusing to make any compromise.
After the implementation of the HKNSL, even though the defendants knew what they had said and done might have already gone beyond the scope of lawful freedom of expression, they paid no regard to it. The defendants intended to cause others to lose confidence in the CPC by stirring up hostility and causing division, so as to achieve the objective of undermining the fundamental system of the PRC. You can see how evil the defendants are in trying to undermine our Constitution and trying to undermine our Central Government.
(Please also refer to the Chinese portion of the remarks.)
Source: AI-found images
