HONG KONG June 6, 2025 – The now disbanded Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China refused to submit information requested by the National Security Department of the police in 2021. At that time, the then vice-chairman, Chow Hang-tung, and committee members Tang Ngok-kwan and Hui Hon-kwong were found guilty of the offense of “failure to comply with notice to provide information” under the Implementation Rules of the Hong Kong National Security Law. The three individuals appealed their convictions and sentences, and the final court ruled today (6th) that their appeals were successful, overturning the convictions and sentences.
The cases of the refusal to submit information by the Hong Kong Alliance and the incitement cases were both announced this morning at the Court of Final Appeal. Tang Ngok-kwan, holding newspaper clippings, appeared at the court this morning and said upon leaving, “I hope today can prove that the Alliance is not a foreign agent, and I hope in the future we can prove that the June Fourth Movement was not counter-revolutionary turmoil.”
He described it as vindicating the innocence of the volunteers at the Alliance, saying, “Many volunteers of the Alliance at that time, if some have passed away, it would be even more embarrassing. If we admitted guilt, it would be a great relief for the volunteers of the Alliance and friends who support the Alliance.” When asked if he was satisfied with the ruling, he did not give a clear response, only stating, “Regardless of the outcome, everyone knows in their hearts.”
Regarding Chow Hang-tung’s self-defense up to the final court and winning the case, Tang Ngok-kwan described it with a lyric from a song, “There is me because of your stubbornness,” and indicated that Chow Hang-tung’s persistence had encouraged the Alliance. When asked if they would seek compensation in the future, Tang said, “Let’s talk about it later.”
Chow Hang-tung’s mother said she saw her daughter smiling in court, “She always says she is doing what she believes is right, she has no reason to be unhappy, so everyone can rest assured.” Chow’s mother also expressed, “I hope the world becomes a better place, and everyone should uphold kindness and justice.”
Claudia Mo, the chairman of the Democratic Party, and member Tse Kin-sing also attended the court session. Tse Kin-sing, upon leaving the court, relayed a message from Chow Hang-tung to him inside the court, saying, “Remember to tell Tang Ping-keung to apologize to her.”
The controversy over the appeal stems from the fact that, according to Article 43, Annex 5, Section 3(1) of the Hong Kong National Security Law, if the Commissioner of Police has reasonable grounds to believe that there is a need to prevent and investigate crimes endangering national security, a written notice may be issued to “foreign agents” requiring specified information from relevant organizations. Therefore, the police must establish that the Alliance is a “foreign agent” in order to exercise these powers, and the relevant regulations may not necessarily apply to “suspected foreign agents.”
The Court of Final Appeal ruled that the interpretation based on the wording and legislative purpose of the relevant provisions shows that the prosecution must prove that the recipients of the notice are actually “foreign agents.” This is a necessary element of the offense, and merely proving that the Commissioner reasonably believes them to be “foreign agents” is not sufficient.
The court also allowed challenges to the effectiveness of the notice as a defense, given that the effectiveness of the notice is a necessary element of the offense. The final court pointed out that the Implementation Rules do not provide any independent procedure to challenge the issuance or effectiveness of the notice, and its legislative intent does not suggest that criminal courts are inappropriate for hearing such challenges.
Furthermore, the prosecution’s charges were based on two documents, with the conclusions of the two documents stating that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the Alliance is a foreign agent, but the contents of the assessments were redacted. The appellants questioned that the redactions prevented a fair trial from taking place.
The Court of Final Appeal ruled that the redaction of relevant contents prevented the appellants from knowing the prosecution’s arguments on the necessary elements of the offense. Therefore, a fair trial could not be conducted, and the court bluntly stated that the prosecution’s actions had removed the only evidence that could establish the Alliance as a foreign agent, which had backfired in terms of evidence.
Regarding the dispute over whether the National Security Department could request information that existed before the Hong Kong National Security Law came into effect on June 30, 2020, the Court of Final Appeal ruled that the police could request the submission of information that existed prior to that date.
Case Number: FACC11, 12/2024.