Hong Kong journalist-turned-activist Gwyneth Ho, one of the 47 pro-democracy figures charged with conspiracy to commit subversion, has told a national security trial that she upheld the Basic Law and disagreed with what she described as a subjective decision to bar her from standing in a legislative race in 2020.
The 32-year-old former Stand News reporter on Thursday told a panel of three handpicked judges of how the Beijing-enacted security law was inserted into the Basic Law – the city’s mini-constitution – as part of Annex III and bypassed the local legislature.
Ho’s remarks were part of her testimony at a high-profile trial relating to dozens of prominent Hong Kong democrats, including former lawmakers, ex-district councillors and other activists. Only 16 are on trial after they denied the subversion charge, while others pleaded guilty earlier and are awaiting sentencing, with the maximum being life imprisonment.
They stand accused of organising or participating in an unofficial legislative primary election held in July 2020, which aimed to help the pro-democracy camp select the strongest election candidates and win a controlling majority in the then-70-seat legislature.
Prosecutors have alleged that the democrats intended to abuse their powers as lawmakers – if elected – to indiscriminately vote down government bills, paralyse government operations, cause the chief executive to dissolve the Legislative Council, and ultimately force the city’s leader to resign.
The Hong Kong government later postponed the election, citing public health concerns amid the Covid-19 pandemic. It was eventually held under an overhauled electoral system steered by Beijing which made it much harder for opposition candidates to stand.
Ho, who won the primary election in the New Territories East geographical constituency, was disqualified from running in the legislative poll by a government returning officer after she was deemed to have failed to meet the requirement of upholding the Basic Law.
The ex-journalist on Wednesday told the court that she disagreed with the electoral officer’s decision, saying she believed she upheld the Basic Law.
“In my eyes, I am upholding the Basic Law, because it does contain a lot of provisions about checks and balances of power… but then it was [evaluated] by the returning officer – how they decide whether a person embraces the Basic Law or not – was a subjective decision,” she said in Cantonese.
Ho, who was called to the witness stand for the eighth day on Wednesday, testified previously that she had predicted that her public opposition to the national security law would cause her to be disqualified.
She stood by her criticism of the sweeping law in court on Wednesday, when she said the legislation was “not subject to judicial monitoring” and pointed to a provision in the security law, which shields the decisions made by the Committee for Safeguarding National Security from judicial reviews.
“It’s hard to put it politely. But the emergence of the national security law made the Basic Law a condom,” she said.
Representing Ho, barrister Trevor Beel asked his client if she agreed with the allegations made by the prosecutors, including Ho having an intention to subvert the state power.
In response, Ho said she disagreed, but added that she could “understand” why her actions could be seen as subversive.
“I can understand why, under the logic of mainland China, this can be seen as subversion – I mean requesting democratisation. But if a common law court endorses this, then I think it is causing mutual destruction to the Basic Law,” Ho said.
The trial hearing will continue on Friday as counsels for other defendants are set to raise questions to the ex-journalist.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
latest national security stories
