For three decades, Victoria Park in Hong Kong held thousands of flickering candles every single night of June fourth. It was the only place on Chinese soil where people could openly mourn the victims of the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. That open chapter of public history is now officially closed. A Hong Kong court has convicted two prominent former leaders of the organizing alliance for inciting subversion under the national security law.
Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung, core organizers of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, faced charges that carried up to ten years in prison. Alongside them, the alliance itself was found guilty. This verdict marks the formal criminalization of the infrastructure of remembrance that once defined the city's civil society.
The Core Legal Battle Over Slogans
The prosecution didn't focus on acts of physical violence. Instead, the entire case hinged on words and political slogans. The primary target was the alliance's long-standing demand to "end one-party dictatorship".
Government-approved judges ruled that this phrase was not a benign call for political reform or constitutional multiparty cooperation. Instead, they argued that demanding an end to the party's rule meant attempting to overthrow and undermine the socialist system defined in China's constitution. The court claimed that by continuing to use the slogan after the 2020 national security law took effect, the organizers intentionally encouraged supporters to work toward that goal through unlawful means.
During the trial, the defendants pushed back hard against this interpretation. Lee Cheuk-yan argued that the slogan aimed to move toward democracy and let citizens choose their leaders rather than enforce a dictatorship. Chow Hang-tung, a barrister who defended herself in court, maintained that the phrase merely targeted unrestricted power.
Yet, the defense held little weight under the current judicial framework. When the verdict was handed down, Lee and Chow smiled and waved to supporters in the public gallery before heading back into custody. A third defendant, Albert Ho, had pleaded guilty earlier in January. All three await sentencing hearings.
What This Means for Dissent and Memory
Legal scholars and human rights observers view this trial as a clear turning point for the former British colony. Under the "one country, two systems" framework, Hong Kong once maintained independent legal traditions and broad freedoms of speech. This latest ruling demonstrates how quickly those boundaries have shifted since Beijing imposed the security law.
Eric Lai, a senior fellow at the Georgetown Center for Asian Law, noted that the verdict brings Hong Kong's judiciary closer to the party-led model seen on the Chinese mainland. The charge of inciting subversion, historically used against dissidents and intellectuals across mainland China, is now actively shaping the political reality in Hong Kong.
The physical spaces of memory have changed just as fast. The annual vigil site at Victoria Park has already seen alternative events, including pro-Beijing carnivals, pushed into the space once reserved for candlelight. Police presence outside the courthouse during the verdict underscored the strict limits now placed on any public gathering or display of historical remembrance. Supporters who queued in the rain were barred from entry if they carried items referencing the June fourth anniversary.
As the courts prepare to hand down final prison terms, the message from authorities is unmistakable. Moderation of method offers no protection if the core objectives of an organization clash with the constitutional status of the ruling party. The candlelight vigils are gone, and the legal tools used to dismantle them leave little room for public dissent to return.
