National security office backs HK Alliance verdict
Crhk · 2 SOURCESabout 3 hours ago2 MIN
Summary
Hong Kong’s Office for Safeguarding National Security of the Central People’s Government said it firmly supports the Hong Kong judiciary’s convictions in the Hong Kong Alliance case, calling the ruling a demonstration of the rule of law and a defence of the authority of the National Security Law. The court found the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung guilty of inciting subversion. The office said the defendants had long promoted slogans including “end one-party dictatorship” and had continued after the National Security Law took effect. It also criticised some Western politicians, anti-China media and what it called anti-Hong Kong forces for urging the unconditional release of Chow Hang-tung and alleging prolonged detention.
Key Points
- The national security office said it firmly supports Hong Kong courts for lawfully convicting non-pleading defendants in the Hong Kong Alliance case
- According to the statement, the Hong Kong Alliance, Lee Cheuk-yan and Chow Hang-tung were convicted of inciting subversion of state power
- The office said the defendants had long advocated “end one-party dictatorship”, seeking to undermine the constitutional order and China’s fundamental state system
- It said the conduct continued after implementation of the Hong Kong National Security Law, causing real harm to national security and social stability.
- The statement described the trial as open and transparent, and condemned foreign calls for release as political interference in Hong Kong’s judiciary.
Why It Matters
The statement reinforces official backing for Hong Kong’s courts and law enforcement in national security cases, while framing the verdict as part of the city’s constitutional duty to safeguard national security. For Hong Kong readers, it also signals that authorities will continue to reject overseas criticism and pursue offences they say are committed under the guise of free speech or press freedom