Detained Hong Kong activist Chow Hang-tung to launch 36-hour hunger strike on Tiananmen crackdown anniversary
The 39-year-old activist, who has been detained since September 2021 pending trial under the national security law, said in a Patreon post on Sunday that she would commemorate June 4 and 'reaffirm our commitment' by fasting for 36 hours.
This is the third year that Chow has planned a hunger strike behind bars to mark the anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown. She began a 34-hour hunger strike on June 4, 2023, and vowed to extend her fast by one hour each year.
'I believe we all will have our own ways to remember the day,' read the post shared by Chow's Patreon account, which is managed by the activist's family and friends.
Chow is the former vice chairperson of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, which organised Hong Kong's annual Tiananmen vigils.
She is facing trial for incitement to subversion alongside the group and its two former leaders, Lee Cheuk-yan and Albert Ho.
According to the Judiciary's website, Chow, Lee, and Ho are set to appear in court on August 4 for a second pre-trial review. Chow is also expected to make an application for quashing her indictment on November 3, a week before the 75-day trial is scheduled to begin on November 11.
For three decades, the alliance organised an annual candlelight vigil to commemorate the victims of the Tiananmen crackdown, which occurred on June 4, 1989. It is estimated that hundreds, perhaps thousands, died when the People's Liberation Army quashed a student-led pro-democracy movement in Beijing.
The vigil in Victoria Park has been banned since Beijing imposed a security law on the city in June 2020. The Alliance voted a year later to disband after its former leaders were prosecuted.
In the Patreon post, Chow also reflected on winning an appeal at the city's top court in March, which quashed her conviction and those of two other former Alliance members for failing to comply with a national security police data request.
The three were jailed for four and a half months each in August 2023 and had completed their term before winning the final appeal.
The case was a 'manifestation of justice and the rule of law' for those implicated, she said.
However, there is still a need to reflect on 'how such injustice has occurred,' she added.
Chow accused the Department of Justice and the court of concurring with 'false accusations' made by the national security police that the Alliance had been a foreign agent. She said the 'actual crime' in the case was the 'smearing and prosecution of citizens.'
'Indeed, the criticism for this so-called technical victory should have focused on the lenient treatments of these evildoers,' she wrote.
Chow added she had demanded that Secretary for Security Chris Tang apologise after the top court's ruling, but she was 'not certain' about how long it would take for the apology to come.
'History tells us that it will likely take a very long time – The Tiananmen Mothers have been waiting for 36 years and still have not received an apology. However, they have not given up on holding the government accountable,' she wrote.
Beijing inserted national security legislation directly into Hong Kong's mini-constitution in June 2020 following a year of pro-democracy protests and unrest. It criminalised subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts – broadly defined to include disruption to transport and other infrastructure. The move gave police sweeping new powers and led to hundreds of arrests amid new legal precedents, while dozens of civil society groups disappeared. The authorities say it restored stability and peace to the city, rejecting criticism from trade partners, the UN and NGOs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
HKFP
a day ago
- HKFP
Hong Kong man arrested for allegedly threatening media outlets to publish ‘seditious' report
Hong Kong's national security police have arrested a man for allegedly threatening multiple media outlets to publish a report promoting a fundraising website for wanted activists. A 43-year-old man surnamed Tse was arrested in Fanling on Thursday in connection with intimidating letters sent in June to several local media organisations, police said at a press conference on Friday. According to Superintendent Chow Hok-yin, the letters demanded that media outlets publish a report about a website claiming to sell products to raise money for overseas activists wanted by Hong Kong authorities. The website also claimed that proceeds would be used to support activities calling for foreign sanctions on Hong Kong officials and judges. The letters warned that failure to publish the report could result in arson attacks on the media outlets' offices. As the letters and the report allegedly contained elements endangering national security, the case was taken over by the police's national security department, Chow said. Police said the website was hosted on an overseas server, and Tse is suspected to be its creator. Officers found image and text files used to create the website on Tse's computer, along with a document listing the names and office addresses of various local media outlets. Tse was arrested under the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance – commonly known as Article 23 – for alleged 'seditious intention.' He also faces charges of suspected criminal intimidation. Chow declined to name the media organisations involved. Sedition is not covered by the Beijing-imposed national security law, which targets secession, subversion, collusion with foreign forces, and terrorism and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. It was previously criminalised under the colonial-era Crimes Ordinance, with a maximum penalty of two years in prison. That law was repealed in March 2024, when Hong Kong enacted its homegrown security legislation, which raised the penalty for sedition to up to seven years in prison. Separate from the 2020 Beijing-enacted security law, the homegrown Safeguarding National Security Ordinance targets treason, insurrection, sabotage, external interference, sedition, theft of state secrets and espionage. It allows for pre-charge detention of up to 16 days, and suspects' access to lawyers may be restricted, with penalties involving up to life in prison. Article 23 was shelved in 2003 amid mass protests, remaining taboo for years. But, on March 23, 2024, it was enacted having been fast-tracked and unanimously approved at the city's opposition-free legislature. The law has been criticised by rights NGOs, Western states and the UN as vague, broad and 'regressive.' Authorities, however, cited perceived foreign interference and a constitutional duty to 'close loopholes' after the 2019 protests and unrest.
South China Morning Post
2 days ago
- South China Morning Post
Will US-Japan nuclear talks ease Tokyo's concern over a Taiwan Strait conflict?
Experts say the development may ease Japan's concern about supporting Taiwan's defence, but is set to upset Beijing. Japan's Kyodo News reported on the weekend that the two countries had been discussing a scenario in which the US military would use nuclear weapons in the event of a contingency in East Asia. 01:49 Hegseth reaffirms US-Japan alliance against 'aggressive Communist Chinese' Hegseth reaffirms US-Japan alliance against 'aggressive Communist Chinese' The report, citing anonymous sources, said such a move was 'a sign that they are seeking to strengthen the US nuclear umbrella, under which Japan is protected, amid intensifying military activity by China, North Korea and Russia'. Analysts say the latest step builds on the adoption in December of the first 'Guidelines for Extended Deterrence' between the allies, which stressed the need for better communication procedures about US nuclear weapons to defend Japan's security. 'Japan has been seeking stronger US commitments to enhance extended nuclear deterrence … The reported discussions on a potential scenario for the use of nuclear weapons reflect bilateral efforts to implement the guidelines,' said Zhao Tong, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'A strengthened US nuclear umbrella may ease Japan's concerns about supporting Taiwan's defence, but Japan's decisions on military involvement in a future Taiwan contingency will likely hinge more on perceived US commitment to Taiwan and broader regional power dynamics.'
HKFP
4 days ago
- HKFP
Same-sex partnership bill: Hong Kong's top court rulings have force of law – lawmakers should know better
At the heart of Hong Kong's success has been its reputation as a bastion of the rule of law in Asia. Yet Hong Kong's rule of law has been severely tested. In 2014-15, for 79 days, protesters occupied the city's Central district in defiance of the law, characterising their action as civil disobedience. A core characteristic of civil disobedience is breaking the law to protest a political or social cause and facing the consequences. Authorities arrested many of the protesters, especially their leaders, prosecuting and convicting them for public order offences. Officials reminded citizens of their duty to obey the law. In 2019, anti-government protesters repeatedly broke the law, breaking into and trashing the Legislative Council (LegCo) chamber, confronting and resisting police, violating public order laws, rioting, and other kinds of violence and vandalism. By 2021, authorities had arrested at least 10,000 and had charged at least 3,000 with various crimes ranging from riot to undermining national security. In its landmark policy statement made public on October 31, 2019, the Chinese Communist Party's Central Committee reminded the people of Hong Kong of their duty to obey the law and urged authorities to strengthen education in the law. Their focus was on Hong Kong's foundational documents, the Chinese Constitution and the Basic Law, Hong Kong's mini-constitution. Central and local authorities have repeatedly urged citizens to respect the law. It is the law, Chief Executive John Lee has said, and therefore must be obeyed. For example, in 2023, speaking about whether authorities would permit Tiananmen commemorations, the chief executive said: 'Everybody should act in accordance with the law and think of what they do, so as to be ready to face the consequences.' Speaking of national security, Secretary for Security Chris Tang and Secretary for Justice Paul Lam have repeatedly urged citizens to obey the law. As pointed out by Lam, Article 42 of the Basic Law reads: ''Hong Kong residents and other persons in Hong Kong shall have the obligation to abide by the laws in force in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region'. The rule of law can only exist and prevail in a society where people are willing to, and in fact, obey the law. It follows that people who breach the law should be brought to justice.' In our system, Court of Final Appeal (CFA) judgments have the force of law. To disobey the law, as the secretary for justice has pointed out, is unacceptable. It follows that citizens may not cherry-pick the law, deciding on their own which legal obligations to follow and which to ignore. It comes as a disappointment that three lawyers, all LegCo members, appear to be advocating disregarding Hong Kong's legal obligations. At issue is the government's proposal to establish a same-sex partnership recognition scheme to fulfil a top court-imposed legal obligation. The three lawyers – Priscilla Leung, Holden Chow, and Junius Ho – have all denounced a government bill that would meet the court's requirements and are actively campaigning against it. They propose no alternative. Other lawmakers appear to have noticed the hypocrisy. For example, LegCo member Edmund Wong asked whether LegCo would be framed as 'not respecting the rule of law' if it rejected the bill. Simply put, yes. What message does this send? May citizens decide on their own which legal obligations to obey? How can it be right to obey legal obligations generally but to disobey others based on some personal considerations? What if each citizen followed this example? The consequences would be chaos. The Basic Law requires that LegCo consider the government's proposal, and so it should. But are they up to the job? Consider the comments of lawmaker Erik Yim, who declared that if the government's proposal became law, 'after completing registration, the same-sex couples might hold bouquets and even wear wedding gowns [at the registration office], taking pictures and sharing them on social media. This may give society a sense of de facto marriage.' Mr Yim should realise that we already celebrate overseas marriages in Hong Kong. I am attending a same-sex couple's wedding banquet in Hong Kong next month. We hold bouquets, we wear wedding attire, we take pictures and share them on social media. The sky has not fallen. Are all LegCo members well enough informed to pass judgement on this issue? I don't understand. Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Erick Tsang has urged LegCo members to be 'rational, balanced and pragmatic.' Let's hope his advice prevails. We're supposed to have an executive-led system. Where is it? To the government's credit, authorities recognise that even if LegCo rejects the bill, the government will have an ongoing legal obligation to fulfil the CFA's ruling. And so it should.
