Hong Kong releases former opposition lawmakers jailed for subversion
Several former Hong Kong opposition lawmakers jailed in the city's largest national security case were released on Tuesday after over four years in prison, the first among dozens convicted last year to regain their freedom.
Ex-legislators Claudia Mo, Jeremy Tam, Kwok Ka-ki and Gary Fan were part of a group of 47 public figures -- including some of Hong Kong's best-known democracy advocates -- were charged with subversion in 2021 for holding an informal primary election.
The case fell under a national security law imposed on the city by Beijng and drew international condemnation and warnings about Hong Kong's declining freedoms and tolerance of dissent.
Mo, Tam, Kwok and Fan had been kept in custody since 2021 and were each sentenced to four years and two months behind bars after they pleaded guilty.
All four were taken out of prison just before sunrise on Tuesday in cars with curtains drawn.
Speaking outside his home, Mo's husband Philip Bowring said the ex-lawmaker was resting and not in a position to speak to the media.
"She's well and she's in good spirits... We look forward to being together again," Bowring said at his flat, with a "Welcome home mum" banner visible in the dining room.
"We'll be here for a while and getting used to living in Hong Kong again and then probably we'll go to England at some point to see our grandchildren," he added.
Fan told local media he was on his way to reunite with his family and thanked Hongkongers for their concern.
- 'Unjust' -
Beijing imposed a sweeping national security law on Hong Kong in 2020 following huge and sometimes violent pro-democracy protests in the finance hub.
Authorities said an informal primary election held by the former lawmakers which aimed to win a legislative majority, with the ultimate goal of indiscriminately vetoing the government budget, amounted to a conspiracy to subvert state power.
The landmark case involved figures across Hong Kong's once-diverse political spectrum -- including elected lawmakers, district councillors, unionists and academics with views ranging from moderate to radical.
The prison sentences, delivered in November last year, were condemned by Western governments and rights groups.
Mo previously worked as an AFP journalist and cited her experience covering Beijing's bloody 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown as pivotal in her political awakening.
She helped found the now-shuttered Civic Party in 2006 and won a legislative seat in 2012, but later quit the party to campaign on a platform emphasising Hong Kong's distinctive identity from mainland China.
Kwok, 63, and Tam, 49, were also former Civic Party lawmakers. Before entering politics, Kwok worked as a doctor and Tam as an airline pilot.
Fan, 58, was a co-founder of Neo Democrats, a party that advocated for electoral reform and pushed back against China's political and cultural influence on Hong Kong in the 2010s.
- Tightening grip -
Each of the four defendants had their prison terms trimmed due to their guilty pleas, with an additional six-month reduction on account of "past public service and ignorance of the law".
Hong Kong tightened its rules last year so that prisoners convicted of serious national security crimes could not be released early for good behaviour.
The four ex-lawmakers who returned home on Tuesday received the lightest penalty among the defendants and were released taking into account the time they served before trial.
The heaviest penalty in the case -- a 10-year jail sentence -- was imposed on legal academic Benny Tai, whom prosecutors described as the "mastermind" of the subversion plot.
The court is set to hear appeals launched by 14 of the convicted defendants in July.
Hong Kong has arrested 322 people for national security crimes. It has convicted 163 of them as of the start of this month.
Hong Kong enacted a homegrown national security law last year on top of the Beijing-imposed law, an arrangement officials say is needed to restore order.
hol/oho/dhw
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
20 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Russia eyes stronger, sensitive security ties with African countries
Russia says it will deepen ties with African countries, including in sensitive areas like defence and security. Russia intends to strengthen relations with African countries, focusing on defense, security, and economic collaboration. The Wagner Group has withdrawn from Mali, but the Kremlin-backed Africa Corps will continue operations in the West African country. The development aligns with Russia's broader strategy of expanding its presence in nations like Central African Republic and Equatorial Guinea, challenging Western influence.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
NATO chief's speech was meant as a call to arms, but it was also a shameful admission for the alliance
For all the stark warnings and ominous predictions made by the head of NATO today, one key fact remained unmentioned. The West is still funding the Russian war effort to the tune of billions by buying oil and gas, funnelling vast amounts into an economy that is now fully militarised. Russian gas exports to Europe went up by 20% last year and its LNG exports to the EU are now at record levels. Read more: Vladimir Putin's Russia is now making more money from selling fossil fuels than Ukraine receives from allies. NATO's secretary general Mark Rutte did not mention any of that. But he did spell out what Russia is doing with all that hydrocarbon revenue. It is using it to put its economy onto a war footing that is now pumping out munitions at a rate that puts the West to shame, to the extent Russia could have the capability to take on NATO in three to five years, according to Mr Rutte. New Sky News podcast launches on 10 June - simulates an attack by Russia to test UK defences 👉Search for The Wargame on your podcast app👈 The secretary general meant his speech in London as a warning and call to arms. But it was also a shameful admission for the Western alliance he heads. More than three years into this war, Russia is outstripping the entire Western bloc by four to one in terms of munitions production. Russia's economy is 1/25th that of NATO's combined economic might and crippled by sanctions and yet every three months pumps out more shells than the entire NATO bloc manages in a year. And while Europe carries on funding Russia's war effort by buying its oil and gas, none of that is going to change. We are now in the insane and obscene situation where European taxpayers will have to fork out more, a lot more, to counteract the threat of a militarised Russia, whose resurgence is being subsidised by Western countries buying its fossil fuels. Historians will look back on that and wonder why it was allowed to continue more than three years into this devastating conflict.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
The History of White Refugee Narratives
White South Africans who support U.S. President Donald Trump in front of the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria, South Africa on February 15, 2025. Credit - Marco Longari—AFP/Getty Images In May, a charter flight from Johannesburg landed at Dulles International Airport. About 50 white South Africans, known as Afrikaners, were on board, claiming that their livelihoods were jeopardized by a climate of "anti-white racism." This depiction of South Africa has resonated among American right-wing commentators since at least the first Trump Administration. In the view of folks such as Tucker Carlson, Charlie Kirk, and Stephen Miller, efforts to redress inequalities and injustices borne of the Apartheid era constitute, in Miller's words, 'race-based persecution.' The Afrikaners' whiteness, they claim, opens them up to discrimination, threatens the seizure of their farms, and makes them targets of violence. In response, the Trump Administration has granted some Afrikaners refugee status, a glaring exception to the general halt it has put on the entry of people fleeing persecution from around the world. President Donald Trump has rationalized this exceptional treatment by gesturing to unsubstantiated and debunked reports of racialized attacks. 'It's a genocide that's taking place,' he told reporters. Trump recently used the same terms in an attempt to browbeat South African president Cyril Ramaphosa in the oval office. Now, the Afrikaners are on a fast-track to citizenship. The characterization of 'Black' government as existentially threatening has a long history in the United States. Slaveholders first developed the trope in the 1790s in their representations of the emergent nation of Haiti, framing it as a dangerous site of social experimentation and savagery where Black freedom would inexorably lead to white death. This depiction was reductive, and purposeful. Haiti's 'horrors' served as a rallying cry and a cautionary tale; they justified a certain understanding of the nature (and future) of racial pluralism in the United States. Today, spurious depictions of South Africa as an anti-white hellscape swim in the same waters. The treatment of refugees, then and now, brings this similarity into high relief. The Long History of the U.S. Backing White South Africans Haitian independence was declared on January 1, 1804. Before that, Haiti was known world-wide as Saint Domingue, a French colony on the western third of Hispaniola that generated tremendous wealth on the backs of enslaved Africans. The series of events that history deems 'the Haitian Revolution' spanned the prior 14 years and encompassed a staggering array of changes. Americans were intimately aware of those events. Over the period, 'St. Domingo' was depicted as a beleaguered colony, a site of fights over racial equality, a plantation economy unraveled by slave rebellion, a place where slavery was legally abolished, a diplomatic partner, and a player in European geopolitics. After 1804, the country became the second independent nation in the Western hemisphere, one expressly defined around the absence of slavery and colonial control. All Haitians, regardless of their ethnicity, were constitutionally defined as 'Black'; land was to be shared; runaway slaves were declared free the moment they touched its shores. In an age of revolutionary change, there was perhaps no more radical shift than this. For most white Americans, and especially enslavers, the white colonists of Saint Domingue experiencing these changes were a focus of racial empathy. 'When we recollect how nearly similar the situation of the Southern States and St. Domingo are in the profusion of Slaves,' South Carolina's governor wrote to the colony's General Assembly in September 1791, 'we cannot but sensibly fear for your situation.' The thousands of white French colonists who fled Haiti and arrived in American communities after a particular moment of disruption in June 1793 were met with open arms, receiving support from private groups, state governments, and the U.S. Congress alike. Dominguans of color, meanwhile, were painted as figures of terror. 'French negroes' prowled Southern nightmares. Southern states and municipalities quickly passed laws that prevented Black refugees from entering their borders (and requiring those present to depart). Rumors of connections between Saint Domingue and slave resistance abounded in Virginia after 1793 and shaped how whites understood Gabriel's revolt in Richmond in 1800. Denmark Vesey's rumored insurrectionary plot in Charleston, South Carolina in 1822 centered around the notion that he had been in contact with Haitian leaders. While posed as being about a threat from without, this U.S. hysteria had everything to do with domestic realities. White American anxiety over 'the horrors of St. Domingo' reified a nation that was white. The phrase cropped up repeatedly as a way to describe the dangers of antislavery activism and 'fanatical' notions of human equality within the United States that weakened the master class's authority and opened the floodgates for Black violence. This narrative proved to be powerful and long-lasting. In 1859, 68 years after the initial insurrections, a proslavery writer would describe John Brown's raid as 'nothing more nor nothing less than an attempt to do on a vast scale what was done in St. Domingo in 1791.' A pro-Confederate cartoon in 1863 showed Abraham Lincoln penning the Emancipation Proclamation with his foot on the Constitution, the devil on his desk, and a blood-drenched picture of Haiti over his shoulder. By this treatment, Haiti was an upside-down world: Black people were free and white people were dead, a depiction that normalized and celebrated the United States as a white slaveholding republic. The Vilification of Springfield's Haitians Taps Into a Long and Troubling History There were other American understandings of the burgeoning Haitian Revolution alongside this one. Some Americans looked to Saint Domingue and saw a just struggle for human dignity and racial equality. Alongside the Revolution in France, Saint Domingue sparked conversations about an oncoming global democratic wave rooted in universal human rights, one that would sweep away tyranny of all sorts. The fact that Americans, white and Black, made these cosmopolitan connections reminds us that, although the American war for independence was in the (recent) past, the American Revolution—the meaning, and quality of the new polity—was very much in flux. White Americans' reactions to events in Saint Domingue allowed for discussions about an American future in which slavery would not exist. The white Dominguans refugees arriving in Philadelphia in 1793 entered a state in which slavery was being gradually ended and in which white and Black activists were attempting to spread that ethos nationwide. As elsewhere, Philadelphia's philanthropic community rose up to provide them food, shelter, and succor, but the white Dominguans were not permitted to maintain their slaves (despite their best efforts to do so). In the 19th century, Americans of color would take Haiti as an emblem of possibility, one that helped bolster pride and engender action. Like the proslavery usage, these efforts were an attempt to make Haiti into an argument about citizenship, race, and rights in the United States. The Trump Administration's decision to grant Afrikaners refugee status flies in the face of U.S. procedures and practice in place since the 1980 Refugee Act, which, in accordance with the international definition, defines a refugee as a person with a 'well-founded fear of persecution.' This initiative bears many of the hallmarks of a Trump policy—it originates from a selective understanding of the realities on the ground; it has been conveyed, explained, and rationalized via a blend of bullying and bluster; above all, it is driven by a venal self-interest. At its heart, the policy seems to bolster Trump's picture of the dangers of initiatives that place value on striving for racial equality. In this view, the Afrikaners are quite literally pale-faced messengers: their plight fits snugly alongside Trump's attacks on institutions of higher education and the U.S. civil service as bastions of antisemitism and DEI initiatives. As such, the administration is overtly taking a side in a longstanding, and ongoing, battle over the meaning of the American nation. James Alexander Dun is a historian at Princeton University and the author of Dangerous Neighbors: Making the Haitian Revolution in Early America. Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors. Write to Made by History at madebyhistory@
