Hong Kong 47: opposition activist says court a discredit to constitution in subversion case
Yu was among 14 opposition politicians and activists convicted of a conspiracy to subvert state power by the trio of judges, who were hand-picked by the chief executive to hear cases tried under the Beijing-decreed national security law.
The ruling means a total of 45 opposition figures, including 31 who pleaded guilty before the trial, may face substantial jail terms for their involvement in an unofficial legislative “primary” election in July 2020.
A prison van arrives at West Kowloon Magistrates Court on the day of mitigation proceedings in the largest national security trial of nine defendants Photo: Xiaomei Chen
The court held that the primary formed an integral part of a scheme to paralyse the government, and eventually overthrow it by creating a constitutional crisis, through the abuse of lawmakers’ voting powers.
Yu, founder and former chairwoman of the now-disbanded Hospital Authority Employees Alliance, asked the judges to sentence her to no more than three years imprisonment, or a term towards the lower end of between three and 10 years for such crimes.
She submitted a letter explaining her political motivation and objections to her guilty verdict.
She said she had hoped to break the “deadlock” in society in late 2019 and early 2020, when the government refused to accede to protesters’ “five demands” and snubbed a suggestion to close the border with mainland China at the outset of the Covid-19 pandemic.
The activist argued the court’s conclusion that her running for election amounted to subversion was “unheard of” in other democracies.
Yu also challenged the judges’ findings that the pursuit of the “five demands” was “practically impossible”. One of those demands related to universal suffrage in the city.
She said the government had a constitutional duty under the Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution, to implement dual universal suffrage, allowing the chief executive and all members of the legislature to be elected by a popular vote.
The defendant stressed that the duty was the same as the constitutional requirement for the government to enact a national security law pursuant to Article 23 of the Basic Law.
“Even now, I am still of the view that there is nothing wrong in bringing changes to the established [constitutional] order through voting in the legislature. Perhaps the only wrong I have committed is that I love Hong Kong too much,” Yu added.
Mr Justice Alex Lee Wan-tang said the bench was not convinced the activist deserved a lighter sentence based on her statement.
Yu’s counsel, Randy Shek Shu-ming, said his client was unwilling to renounce her political views, but Justice Andrew Chan rejected that explanation and suggested the lawyer did not have to make any pleas of mitigation.
Another defence counsel, Douglas Kwok King-hin, asked the court to consider his client, former district councillor Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit, as a law-abiding resident who had always sought police approval when he organised mass rallies in 2019 as convenor of the now-defunct Civil Human Rights Front.
Kwok highlighted a mitigation letter written by co-defendant Au Nok-hin, an organiser of the primary election, who praised Sham’s compliance with non-violence principles and for being willing to negotiate with police during the 2019 social unrest.
Au, one of the prosecution witnesses in the case, said Sham played a pivotal role when candidates running in the primary’s Kowloon West constituency decided they would not advocate an indiscriminate vote against the city’s budget as a means to bring down the government, despite Sham’s eventual agreement to the subversive scheme.
A fifth batch of eight convicted defendants, including ex-lawmakers Eddie Chu Hoi-dick and Andrew Wan Siu-kin, will take the stand when the mitigation hearing resumes on July 30.
