Hong Kong 47: Ex-journalist Gwyneth Ho risks longer sentence by not submitting mitigation plea in national security case
Hong Kong Free Press
Hong Kong journalist-turned-activist Gwyneth Ho did not submit a mitigation statement in the city’s largest national security trial, a move that could see her handed a longer jail term for an offence with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Former Stand News journalist Ho appeared at the West Kowloon Law Courts Building on Tuesday alongside eight other pro-democracy activists, whose turn it was to submit mitigation pleas before being sentenced for conspiring to subvert state power under the Beijing-imposed national security law.
The offence revolves around an unofficial primary election in July 2020 that aimed to help the pro-democracy camp secure a majority in the city’s legislature, and which a panel of three national security judges ruled would have plunged Hong Kong into a “constitutional crisis.”
Ho pleaded not guilty and was convicted in May. In the verdict, the judges wrote that she was among the participants with the “most radical political view.” The judges also commented on Ho’s conduct when she testified in court, saying that she had raised objections when things were not done “in accordance to her understanding or instruction.”
On Tuesday morning, Ho’s lawyer Trevor Beel confirmed with the court the details of her criminal record. He said he had no mitigation plea to deliver to the judges beyond that.
Ho, who was wearing a white tank top and had her hair tied up, had no visible reaction when Beel addressed the court.
Since June, the activists have been presenting their mitigation pleas to the court, mostly through their legal representatives. The mitigation procedure – which comes before their penalty is handed down – is intended for defendants to convince judges why they should be entitled to a lighter sentence.
Throughout mitigation hearings, lawyers have submitted mitigation letters showing the remorse of some of the defendants and highlighted their contributions to the community. Many of those convicted were former lawmakers and district councillors.
By not submitting a mitigation plea, Ho stands a high chance of being handed a longer sentence than her fellow activists.
The eight are the last batch of 45 activists convicted in the landmark case to have their turn in the mitigation hearings. Most have been detained for over three years since they were charged.
Not an ‘opportunist’
After Beel’s brief statement, activist Ventus Lau addressed the court personally, making him only the second defendant to do so after ex-district councillor Ng Kin-wai last week.
Wearing a blue suit jacket and speaking from behind the glass panels of the defendant dock, Lau, 30, first talked about his level of participation in the conspiracy. He said he could be considered an “active” participant, but within that label should “not be among the most active,” as his key focus of participating in the primary was not to veto government bills if elected into the Legislative Council (LegCo).
He said his motivation for becoming a lawmaker was to advocate for the protesters who had been arrested over alleged rioting.
Lau also brought up the point of totality, a legal term referring to how a court sentences a defendant when they have been convicted of more than one offence. He said he had already been punished for participating in the storming of the LegCo in July 2019. The activist was jailed for 4.5 months in March over the incident.
The LegCo incident and his participation in the primaries were part of the “same series of events,” he said, as to him they bore the same goal of fighting for the demands of protesters in 2019. Given that the two offences were similar and committed in close proximity to each other, Lau said he hoped the court would consider a lighter sentence for the national security conviction.
Completing his statement, Lau read out parts of a mitigation letter written by his girlfriend Emilia Wong. In the letter, Wong described the activist as an intelligent, curious person who could have taken the “normal” route of pursuing a career in law or teaching and enjoyed a comfortable middle-class life. But he strove to enter politics because he cared for society and wanted democracy for Hong Kong, Wong wrote.
In Lau’s own handwritten mitigation letter, which was not read out in court but shared with reporters, the activist wrote that he was not an “opportunist” who began engaging in society during the 2019 protests. He had been committed to community service since being hired as the assistant of a district councillor in 2015, he wrote.
Lau added that he genuinely believed that his participation in the primaries would not land him in legal trouble. “I would not have joined but opt[ed] for other ways to fight for the betterment of the society,” he said.
Ex-lawmakers’ pleas
The court also heard mitigation statements from the lawyers of four ex-lawmakers – Alvin Yeung, Raymond Chan, Lam Cheuk-ting and Gary Fan – on Tuesday. Yeung and Fan pleaded guilty to the offence while Chan and Lam were convicted in May after trial.
Yeung’s lawyer, Edwin Choy, read out his client’s mitigation letter in which he expressed remorse over participating in the primaries. Yeung wrote that he had been “carried away” by the atmosphere at the time and lent his name to the “hopeless and wrongful scheme.”
The ex-lawmaker, who is a barrister, added that it was “embarrassing for [him] as a lawyer to admit to a criminal offence.”
The legal representatives of Chan and Lam highlighted their clients’ work as former lawmakers. Chan fought for the rights of sexual minorities and Lam supported legislation against bid-rigging practices, or anti-competitive behaviour that sees companies secure major contracts, the court heard.
Representing Chan, lawyer David Ma said Chan did not attend a candidates’ debate forum before the primaries or go to the coordination meetings. He was also a “silent reader” of the many WhatsApp groups created to discuss about the primaries, having sent only a single message saying “thank you” to one of the organisers.
Erik Shum, Lam’s lawyer, called his client a “classic” member of the Democratic Party, the city’s biggest opposition party, saying that the party had consistently cooperated with the government. Shum added that Lam was the “main administrator” of the party, and that veterans of the party Emily Lau and Albert Ho bad penned mitigation letters for him.
Lam also did not attend the coordination meetings and never signed the “Inked Without Regret” declaration, a document stating that primary participants would use their powers as lawmakers to veto the government budget.
Barrister Margaret Ng, who represented Fan, cited his work as a district councillor in Sai Kung for over 20 years before becoming a lawmaker. Fan was a “very pragmatic” councillor who wanted to improve living conditions in Sai Kung, and had a high attendance rate at meetings related to district affairs.
Among those to pen mitigation letters for Fan were residents he served as a district councillor, Ng said, adding that the letters showed that Fan was a “very popular councillor.” She also presented to the court a picture Fan drew for residents during Lunar New Year, shared with his legal team by an elderly woman who lived in Sai Kung.
Ng added that Fan was a “family man” – his daughter wrote in a mitigation letter that he was the “best father” anyone could ask for – and that he wished to “put all [this] behind him.”
‘Hot-blooded’
The court also heard mitigation pleas for activist Owen Chow on Monday. Kevin Chan, who represented Chow, said Chow’s “age and immaturity” was at the crux of his mitigation.
The activist was 22 years old during the protests in 2019 and was “hot-blooded” and “ill-informed,” Chan said, adding that he was “charging forward like a mad bull not for personal gain but the good of Hong Kong people.”
He was “vociferous” on occasions such as the coordination meetings and during an election forum because of his eagerness and determination regarding what he believed to be right, Chan added.
Chow, who pleaded not guilty to the offence and was convicted in May, was said by judges in the verdict to hold a “more radical belief.” He was a member of the resistance camp and one of the authors of the Inked Without Regret declaration, the judges said.
The court will continue hearing mitigation statements on Tuesday from social worker Hendrick Lui and businessman Mike Lam.
Protests erupted in June 2019 over a since-axed extradition bill. They escalated into sometimes violent displays of dissent against police behaviour, amid calls for democracy and anger over Beijing’s encroachment. Demonstrators demanded an independent probe into police conduct, amnesty for those arrested and a halt to the characterisation of protests as “riots.”
Beijing inserted national security legislation directly into Hong Kong’s mini-constitution in June 2020 following a year of pro-democracy protests and unrest. It criminalised subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts – broadly defined to include disruption to transport and other infrastructure. The move gave police sweeping new powers and led to hundreds of arrests amid new legal precedents, while dozens of civil society groups disappeared. The authorities say it restored stability and peace to the city, rejecting criticism from trade partners, the UN and NGOs.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
