Why the truth's still worth fighting for in Hong Kong
Chow Hang-tung's statement before her final appeal of a "national security" conviction
Today, January 8, 2025, Hong Kong’s top court, the Court of Final Appeal, heard the final appeal of Chow Hang-tung and two other Hong Kong Alliance Standing Committee members of their conviction under the “national security law” for refusing to comply with an order from the National Security Department (the police division focused on enforcing the national security law) to provide years of the alliance’s records. The NSD made the order on the grounds that it suspected of Hong Kong Alliance of being a “foreign agent.” Five Hong Kong Alliance Standing Committee members were arrested (four on September 8, 2021 and one the next day) and charged with breaching the implementation rules for Article 42 of the national security law: Tsui Hon-kwong (徐漢光), Sean Tang Ngok-kwan ((鄧岳君), Simon Leung Kam-wai (梁錦威), Chan To-wai (陳多偉), and Chow Hang-tung. Simon Leung plead guilty on December 22, 2021 and was sentenced to three months in prison. Chan To-wai plead guilty on May 10, 2022 and was sentenced to three months in prison. The other three plead not guilty, were convicted on March 4, 2023, and sentenced to four and a half months in prison each. At their trial, they said that since the National Security Department suspected Hong Kong Alliance of being foreign agents and ordered the delivery of information about the alliance on those grounds, it needed to provide evidence for that suspicion. The prosecution argued it didn’t, and the judge agreed. So did the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal in rejecting their appeals. The Court of Final Appeal agreed to hear their appeal, which brings us to today.
At the appeal hearing, Chow Hang-tung, who is a lawyer and represented herself, said, “"A police state is created with the complicity of the court in endorsing (the government's) abuses. Such complicity must stop now," in arguing that the CFA must overturn their convictions rather than be complicit in abuses the way the lower courts have been up to now. She went on: "A police state is where the police are free to accuse anyone of being a foreign agent and the court is obliged to defer to that judgement even if that is clearly wrong." The Chief Justice replied, "We are not concerned with what is a police state.” The hearing ended today and the five-judge panel will issue a ruling at a later date. We’ll see whether it’s complicit or not.
The three defendants have fought hard, and some may wonder what the point is. After all, they have already served their sentences, and repression and injustice are so thorough-going in Hong Kong these days, what would it even matter if Chow and co won this case? With that kind of thinking in mind, Chow wrote a statement about the trial that was released on a social media account of her supporters yesterday.
Below is an English translation of Chow’s statement. She is among a small group of unusually outspoken political prisoners in Hong Kong, along with Owen Chow and Gwyneth Ho. Many political prisoners believe, with reason, that they will be retaliated against for making public statements. For that reason, any time a political prisoner does speak out, their voice deserves to be amplified.
The now-defunct Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements in China (香港市民支援愛國民主運動聯合會) existed for nearly thirty years, with the primary purpose of commemorating the June 4, 1989 Tiananmen Massacre and working for justice for the victims and democracy. Chow Hang-tung has already been convicted three times in other trials associated with the Alliance and sentenced to a total of 31.5 months in prison. She’s completed those sentences and is on remand awaiting the most serious trial of all, for “inciting subversion” under the national security law, which after many delays is scheduled to begin on May 6 this year. Her two co-defendants are Lee Cheuk-yan and Albert Ho, also former Hong Kong Alliance leaders, also on long-term remand. The maximum penalty is life in prison.
For background on Hang-tung, see this excellent video. For my previous writing on Hang-tung, see here and here.
Statement by Chow Hang-tung, posted on a social media account run by her supporters in the lead-up to her final appeal of her national security conviction at the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, January 8, 2025
On the morning three years ago when I was awaken by a call from the National Security Department1 and I knew they were looking for me, I would be lying if I said I didn’t panic. But when we actually met and I received the piece of paper they insisted on handing over to me, I realized that I was not acting in a horror movie but a comedy. What? They say we are “foreign agents”? Hong Kong Alliance has so many things they could attack us for but they just want to create trouble for us so they choose this unfounded accusation of “foreign agent.” Isn’t this just like leaving a good knife and sword unused and lazily picking flowers for weapons?
The NSD2 is certainly not foolish. It has a thorough understanding of totalitarian methodology. The power of totalitarianism does not come from facts but from lies and illusions. The most effective way to consolidate totalitarianism is to involve as many people as possible in a drama directed by power, and the more fake and absurd the drama, the better. Only in this way can people's cynicism and servility be harnessed. Those pieces of paper from the NSD are inviting us to be actors. If we are willing to accept our identity as agents and cooperate in their scenario, then objectively speaking, they’ve won. Their power is real, and its shock to society is more effective than killing us with a knife.
Using facts to fight criminals is the logic of normal law enforcement agencies. Using lies to create accomplices is the modus operandi of totalitarian politics.
However, when lies become the pillars of power, they can also be their vulnerability. In this regard, the NSD has really chosen the wrong target this time - the challenge that Hong Kong Alliance has faced over the years is how to turn the lies of power back against it. The most important trick is to stick to the truth and melt illusion with facts.
Therefore, our answer is simple but uncompromising: we are not foreign agents and we reject the role you have arranged for us to play. You want to us to play that role? Then just wait for the script to be reversed.
After more than three years, now that this foreign agent farce has finally reached the Court of Final Appeal, have we successfully rewritten their script?
Judging from our “losses," it seems that everything was in vain. We lost in the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal. Standing Committee members have also served all their sentences. Even if we win the final appeal, the days we have spent in prison will not be given back to us. We were unable to save any Standing Committee members, nor were we able to save the Alliance.
But from the perspective of the regime, the story they want to tell through Hong Kong Alliance can no longer be told. It’s even become a hot potato that cannot be eaten and thrown away. It cannot show that the opposition are all foreign puppets, nor can it prove that in court. Will the world be allowed to see the evidence that we conspired with foreign masters?
After three years and four months of court proceedings, where is the agreed evidence? There’s none, zero, not even a ghost of it. The prosecution argued that "foreign agent" in the documents really means "the police believe you are an agent." If this is the case, then any illegal order will have force. Anyway, the prosecution's argument is that even without proving we are foreign agents, they can still convict us.
We say that the king has no clothes. The opponent's weak retort is only that the king does not need to wear clothes. It is indeed a comedy, but fortunately I am not the butt of the joke. When the king is reduced to saying that he has the right to go naked, his face and dignity have actually been lost long ago. Every court argument becomes a parade of the naked. It’s self-humiliation over and over again. Don’t be confused by seemingly complex legal arguments. To put it simply, the prosecution is trying its best to move the case, going rogue and minimizing what it has to prove legally. Because they know that on the basis of facts and evidence, there’s no way they can win.
Now that things have come to this point, the outcome in the courtroom is actually about whether the court will also be buried under NSD's lies. If even the court decides to strip and run naked with the king, the king might feel better. In fact, they only lose more miserably, and also lose the dignity of the court.
This time, the NSD took the initiative to use "foreign agents" to provoke a fight, but in the end it ended up in a dead end with no win or lose. Politically speaking, it’s a complete defeat.
Some people may say that everyone can see that the king is naked, so what difference does it make if we show that or not?
Even if a lie is not believed, its impact in this world is real as long as people accept it as the basis for their actions and speech. What's more, not everyone can see the king is naked with their own eyes. They just hear everyone's admiration for the gorgeous clothes. I've heard people behind bars say more than once that “yellow” [ie, pro-democracy] people are all paid by foreigners, but people who say this aren’t necessarily totally “blue” [pro-regime].
If we want to see change in the world, we must not remain silent.
It’s said history is not written by the winners but by those with the will. I would like to add that winning or losing should not be defined by others, but should be determined by our own goals.
If our goal is to end dictatorship and build democracy, then continuing to expose the lies of power and cut off the source of their power is the path we must take. Undoubtedly, in the current situation, there seems to be a great disparity between their strength and our weakness. When we watch the bubbles of lies blowing more and more, and it seems that we can’t pop them no matter how hard we try, we may have a moment when we want to say, forget it, let’s just take a bath together. But after that moment passes, if you are still unwilling and unable to give up like me, you should see that no matter how many bubbles they have, they are still fragile and not invincible, even it means you will have to pay a price. How can democracy gain something for nothing? If we only define success or failure based on the harm that the other party will definitely inflict and forget what we want to build and what we can achieve, then we will undoubtedly decide we have lost even before the fight begins.
Who says Hong Kong is a lost cause? As long as we don't give up, this city will not die. We may not be able to expect a quick victory, but we are far from having nothing to do and no battles to win. And in the global struggle between authoritarian expansion and democratic regression, Hong Kong's position on the frontlines has never been so important. We must break out of the self-defined hell of being the loser and find our own direction and purpose. Let’s happily pop bubbles together.
The part of the Hong Kong Police Force primarily responsible for enforcing the national security law
The word Hang-tung actually uses is “gong an,” which is the same as for the Ministry of State Security in China, perhaps because she wants to insinuate that the NSD in Hong Kong essentially is the same as the MSS in China. But to avoid confusion, I’ve simply translated her “gong an” as NSD in this statement.