Twelve democracy campaigners lose their appeal in Hong Kong’s biggest national security trial. What does it mean for the city’s future?
Hong Kong’s High Court on Monday upheld the convictions and prison sentences of 12 pro-democracy campaigners in the city’s largest national security case, reinforcing Beijing’s sweeping crackdown on dissent.
The defendants were part of a group of 45 opposition figures convicted in 2024 for organizing an unofficial primary election in 2020. Authorities deemed the vote a subversive plot, arguing it aimed to secure a legislative majority capable of vetoing the government’s budget and forcing political concessions such as universal suffrage.
Chief Judge Jeremy Poon ruled that the strategy amounted to an unlawful attempt to undermine Hong Kong’s constitutional order. While lawmakers are legally permitted to veto the budget under the city’s Basic Law, the court said using that mechanism as coordinated political leverage crossed into subversion.
Among those whose appeals were dismissed were veteran activist Leung Kwok-hung, known as “Long Hair,” former journalist Gwyneth Ho and Australian citizen Gordon Ng. The defendants waved to supporters in court as the three-judge panel delivered its decision.
Critics swiftly condemned the ruling. Pro-democracy figures described it as a blow to political freedoms, while Amnesty International said the court had missed a chance to correct what it called a miscarriage of justice.
The case traces back to the mass pro-democracy protests of 2019. In response, Beijing imposed a sweeping national security law in 2020, criminalizing acts of secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces. Since then, dozens of opposition politicians, activists and civil society leaders have been arrested or jailed.
Sentences in the broader case ranged from just over four years to 10 years in prison. The 12 appellants may seek a final appeal at Hong Kong’s top court, though it remains unclear whether they will pursue that route.
For many in the city, Monday’s ruling underscores a stark reality: the legal boundaries of political opposition in Hong Kong have fundamentally changed.
