In a Hong Kong courtroom on Friday, three activists—Lee Cheuk-yan, Chow Hang-tung, and Albert Ho—were sentenced to between five and seven-and-a-quarter years in prison for organizing candlelight vigils that once drew over 100,000 people to remember the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. For thirty years, Hong Kong had been the singular exception within Chinese territory: a place where that history could be publicly held. The national security law enacted in 2020 closed that exception, and these sentences mark the moment its closure became irreversible. What is on trial, in the deepest sense, is
Hong Kong sentences Tiananmen vigil organizers to up to 7 years under security law
Three activists imprisoned for 5-7.25 years; Hong Kong Alliance disbanded; public gatherings commemorating Tiananmen crackdown banned since 2020.
Hong Kong was no longer the place where this history could be publicly held.
Mark
Why does it matter that Hong Kong specifically was the place where these vigils happened? Couldn't people remember Tiananmen anywhere?
Mimi
Because mainland China has made it illegal to discuss the crackdown at all. It's censored, erased from history books, scrubbed from the internet. Hong Kong was the one place in Chinese territory where you could actually gather and mark it publicly. That made it rare and important.
Luke
But we should be clear—the vigils were banned in 2020 on Covid grounds, not explicitly because of the national security law. The law came that same year. So the question of whether the law directly caused the ban or whether Covid was the actual reason isn't entirely settled by this reporting.
Mark
And the charges themselves—they're convicted of "inciting subversion." But the actual thing they did was organize a memorial gathering. How does that become subversion?
Mimi
The court said their slogan—"ending one-party dictatorship"—was the incitement. That phrase, the court argued, was designed to make people want to undermine the Communist Party. So the prosecution treated the vigil's political message as the crime, not just the act of gathering.
Luke
Right, and that's the mechanism worth understanding. It's not that they were caught with weapons or planning violence. It's that their speech—their stated political goal—was deemed to cross the line into subversion under this law. That's a much broader definition of what can be criminalized.
Mark
What happens to the memory now? If no one can gather, if the organizers are in prison, does the history just disappear?
Mimi
That's the fear. For thirty years, these vigils were how Hong Kong kept that history alive in a place where it was otherwise forbidden. Now that's gone. People can still remember privately, but the public act of remembrance—the thing that made it visible and collective—that's been removed.
Luke
Though we should note: we don't have reporting on whether people are still finding ways to mark the date privately, or whether the ban has actually stopped all commemoration. The vigils as organized public events are gone, but what people do individually or in small groups isn't documented here.
Le Pouls
- Three activists face a combined nearly twenty years in prison for the act of organizing remembrance—sentences that transform a civic ritual into a criminal conspiracy.
- The Hong Kong Alliance, founded in the weeks before the 1989 crackdown and the backbone of the vigils for three decades, has now been formally dissolved and fined into extinction.
- Inside the courtroom, the weight of the moment was visible: Lee appeared to pray as he was led away, while Chow blew a kiss to a gallery packed with supporters.
- Outside, families and crowds absorbed the verdict—Lee's wife announced plans to appeal, and Chow's mother urged those gathered not to lose heart or feel guilt.
- International human rights organizations condemned the sentences as an assault not only on the activists but on the generations of Hongkongers now denied the legal space to discuss one of modern history's most consequential events.
- The trajectory is unmistakable: Hong Kong is no longer a place where this history can be publicly held, and the national security law continues to expand the boundaries of what counts as dissent.
In a Hong Kong courtroom on Friday, three activists—Lee Cheuk-yan, Chow Hang-tung, and Albert Ho—were sentenced to between five and seven-and-a-quarter years in prison for organizing candlelight vigils that once drew over 100,000 people to remember the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. For thirty years, Hong Kong had been the singular exception within Chinese territory: a place where that history could be publicly held. The national security law enacted in 2020 closed that exception, and these sentences mark the moment its closure became irreversible. What is on trial, in the deepest sense, is the question of who is permitted to remember—and at what cost.
Three Hong Kong activists entered court on Friday already knowing the sentences would redefine what remains possible in a city they had spent decades trying to shape. Lee Cheuk-yan, 69, received seven years. Chow Hang-tung, 41, was sentenced to seven years and three months. Albert Ho, 74, who had pleaded guilty earlier, drew five years. Their crime, in the court's framing, was inciting others to subvert state power—a charge built substantially on their decades of organizing annual vigils to commemorate the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown.
For thirty years, Hong Kong had been unique: the only place within Chinese territory where people could gather openly to mark that history. The vigils grew into mass events, with organizers reporting crowds exceeding 100,000. The Hong Kong Alliance, which coordinated the gatherings, had been founded in May 1989, just weeks before Chinese troops moved into Beijing. The death toll from that crackdown remains disputed and heavily censored on the mainland. Hong Kong's vigils were an act of remembrance in a place where remembrance was still allowed.
That allowance ended in 2020, when authorities banned the gatherings under Covid-19 policies. They never returned. That same year, the national security law came into force. The prosecution's case against the three activists leaned heavily on the Alliance's slogan—'ending one-party dictatorship'—which the court determined had incited people to undermine Communist Party rule. As the sentences were read, Lee appeared to pray. Chow blew a kiss toward a gallery filled with supporters. Ho's expression remained grave.
Outside, grief and resolve mixed. Lee's wife said she could not imagine him serving more years and announced plans to appeal. Chow's mother addressed the crowd: 'Do not lose heart. And above all, do not feel guilty.' The Alliance itself was fined HK$1.5 million, cementing its dissolution. Amnesty International called the outcome 'a triple tragedy'—for the activists, for the survivors of Tiananmen, and for the generations of Hongkongers now denied the space to reckon with that history. Human Rights Watch said the sentences revealed 'the cruelty and insecurity of a government afraid of memory.'
What has changed is not subtle. The vigils are illegal. The activists who organized them are imprisoned. The organization that sustained them is gone. For anyone watching—inside Hong Kong or from the mainland—the message is unambiguous: there are now consequences for remembering.
Three Hong Kong activists walked into court on Friday knowing their sentences would reshape what remains possible in the city they have spent decades trying to change. Lee Cheuk-yan, 69, received seven years in prison. Chow Hang-tung, 41, was handed seven years and three months. Albert Ho, 74, who had pleaded guilty in January, drew five years. All three had been convicted of inciting others to subvert state power—a charge that rested, in significant part, on their decision to organize annual vigils remembering the 1989 crackdown at Tiananmen Square.
For three decades, Hong Kong had been singular: the only place within Chinese territory where people could gather openly to mark that history. The vigils grew large. Organizers said some drew more than 100,000 people, though police counted lower. The Hong Kong Alliance, the group that coordinated these gatherings, had been founded in May 1989, just weeks before Chinese troops and tanks moved into Beijing to crush pro-democracy protests. The death toll from that crackdown remains contested—estimates range from hundreds to many thousands—and the subject remains heavily censored on the mainland. Hong Kong's vigils were an act of remembrance in a place where remembrance was still permitted.
That permission ended in 2020. Authorities banned the gatherings citing Covid-19 policies. They never resumed. That same year, Hong Kong's national security law came into force, expanding what the government could prosecute as dissent. The law, officials argued, was necessary for stability. Critics said it had hollowed out Hong Kong's autonomy and created an atmosphere where people learned to be afraid. Lee, Chow, and Ho were charged in 2021 and faced up to ten years in prison. On Friday, the sentences came down.
The trial had hinged on language. A key element of the prosecution's case centered on the Hong Kong Alliance's slogan: "ending one-party dictatorship." The court determined this phrase had incited people to undermine the Chinese Communist Party. According to a court summary from August, Lee and Chow had "incited other persons to organise, plan, commit or participate in acts by unlawful means with a view to subverting the state power." In May, Chow had told the court that the law itself was on trial. The moment the sentences were read, Lee stood and appeared to pray as he was led from the dock. Chow blew a kiss to the public gallery, which was filled with supporters. Ho's expression remained grave.
Outside the courtroom, the weight of what had happened settled differently on different people. Lee's wife, Elizabeth Tang, called it a sad day. "I cannot imagine that he has to spend another three years in jail," she said, noting that Lee intended to appeal. Chow's mother, Medina, addressed the crowd gathered outside. "Do not lose heart," she said. "And above all, do not feel guilty." Before her own arrest in 2022, Chow had told the BBC she was prepared for this. "I am willing to pay the price for fighting for democracy," she had said.
The court also imposed a fine of HK$1.5 million—roughly $191,000—on the Hong Kong Alliance itself, effectively cementing the organization's dissolution. International human rights organizations responded swiftly. Amnesty International's Deputy Regional Director Sarah Brooks called the sentencing "a triple tragedy: for the activists being unjustly punished; the survivors and victims of the Tiananmen crackdown itself; and the generations of Hongkongers denied the space to discuss one of the most consequential events in modern Chinese history." Human Rights Watch said the sentences "expose the cruelty and insecurity of a government afraid of memory and the people."
What has shifted is not subtle. Hong Kong is no longer the place where this history could be publicly held. The vigils that once drew crowds in the tens of thousands are now illegal. The activists who organized them are in prison. The organization that coordinated them has been dismantled. The national security law remains in place, its reach expanding. For anyone watching from inside Hong Kong or from the mainland, the message is clear: there are now consequences for remembering.
Citations marquantes
I cannot imagine that he has to spend another three years in jail, it is really unacceptable.— Elizabeth Tang, wife of Lee Cheuk-yan
Do not lose heart. And above all, do not feel guilty.— Medina, mother of Chow Hang-tung, addressing supporters outside court
Envie de l'histoire complète ?
Lire l'original sur BBC News ↗
Politics & Governance