Appeals rejected for 12 convicted in 35+ subversion case

Hong Kong’s Court of Appeal dismissed appeals lodged by 12 defendants convicted of conspiracy to commit subversion in connection with the 2020 informal primary election that authorities deemed a subversive plot.

Three Court of Appeal judges – Jeremy Poon, Anthea Pang, and Derek Pang upheld the activists’ convictions and jail terms - ranging from four years and five months to seven years and nine months - on Monday, delivering their decision at the West Kowloon Law Courts Building.

The government’s appeal against barrister and democracy activist Lawrence Lau Wai-chung’s acquittal was also rejected by the court, meaning he remains cleared of his charge.

The 12 defendants include former lawmaker Lam Cheuk-ting, "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung, Helena Wong Pik-wan, and activists Gwyneth Ho Kwai-lam.

In its ruling, the court said the convicted defendants organized the primary with the aim of forcing the Chief Executive to resign, paralyzing government operations and compelling the Central People’s Government to declare an end to the “One Country, Two Systems” policy.

It held that the plan constituted a means of seriously interfering with, obstructing, undermining or even subverting the constitutional order of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, describing it as a “constitutional mass destruction weapon” that fell within the scope of unlawful acts under the national security law.

The court said the executive and legislative branches must interact and cooperate, and that the Legislative Council’s scrutiny and approval of the government budget is part of its constitutional function.

It noted that the legislature is not a national legislative body, and that its role and powers are conferred by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress. Lawmakers, the court said, must not act in breach of the Basic Law or their oath of office, and are constitutionally required to uphold the constitutional order of the Hong Kong SAR.

Addressing the defendants’ proposal to veto the budget indiscriminately, the court said taking into account matters unrelated to the merits of the budget amounted to a departure from the core functions of a legislator. Using the budget process to force the resignation of the Chief Executive would be inconsistent with a lawmaker’s constitutional duty to safeguard the constitutional order, it added.

The court also rejected the argument that it should not interfere with the Legislative Council’s internal procedures for scrutinizing the budget, ruling that the principle of non-intervention did not apply in this case.

Separately, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Department of Justice’s appeal against the acquittal of barrister Lau.

The court accepted that Lau had not personally signed the online declaration pledging to veto government budgets indiscriminately, nor had he publicly or directly advocated the “five demands” or a bundled veto of the budget. It found that he had participated in the primary purely to gain recognition.

Speaking outside court, Lau thanked supporters for their concern and said he believed the Department of Justice is a guardian of the rule of law. Together with Lee Yue-shun, whose acquittal was not appealed by the prosecution, two defendants remain acquitted while 45 were convicted in the case.

Several convicted defendants who have completed their sentences attended the hearing, including Lester Shum Ngo-fai and Fergus Leung Fong-wai.