by Gwyneth Ho*

One of the 45 people given very harsh sentences yesterday for organising primary elections in Hong Kong was able to smuggle her thoughts out of prison. “We dared to confront the regime with the question,” she writes. “Will democracy ever be possible within such a structure? The answer was a complete crackdown on all fronts of society.” “Defend and repair your own democracy,” she says in an appeal to the world. “Give authoritarian dictators one less example of failed democracy to justify their rule, and give freedom fighters around the world one more inspiration to continue the struggle”.

Hong Kong (AsiaNews) – The day after 45 pro-democracy activists were handed down very harsh sentences for “subversion”; i.e. organising primaries ahead of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council elections in 2020, Jimmy Lai, the Catholic entrepreneur and founder of the Apple Daily tabloid paper, appeared in court again. Beijing has tried to silence him in the recent years. Today, on the witness stand, cross-examined by his defence team, he denied ever supporting violence, nor Hong Kong independence, “a crazy idea”, he said. He also rejected the accusation of "collusion with foreign forces", explaining that only one idea was behind the Apple Daily: “The more information you have, the more you are in the know, the more you're free.”

On the sense of these battles and what is happening in Hong Kong, we publish below a reflection by Gwyneth Ho, a journalist jailed in 2021. She is among those sentenced yesterday, given a seven-year prison term, a particularly harsh verdict due to her refusal to plead guilty, which would have ensured her a lighter treatment.

After a long period of silence, she managed to smuggle her thoughts out of prison, which were posted on her Facebook profile to be shared on the day of the sentence. We publish large excerpts below.

I ran in the last free and fair election in Hong Kong. For that, I was prosecuted in the first Soviet(?)/CCP-style subversion case tried in a common law court. I pleaded not guilty to defend the political expression of 610,000 Hong Kong people, which the regime is trying to distort and reduce into a conspiracy of 47 foreign-brainwashed, faithless pawns, with life imprisonment on the table.

The situation is dire, yet when going into the details, it becomes a bit comical: the unforgivably evil subversive act of the accused was aiming for a parliamentary majority with the power to veto the annual budget. Following such logic, one may as well claim that democracies around the world suffer subversion attempts every 4 to 6 years. In a 1984-esque reality though, democratization – or just calling for it – amounts to subversion of state power. Makes perfect sense.

Behind the rhetoric of secession, collusion with foreign forces, etc., our true crime, for Beijing, is that we were not content with playing along in manipulated elections. We organized ourselves to rise above partisan fragmentation, came together, and attempted to break through. We dared to reach for actual power to hold the government accountable. Even though it was enshrined as a right of the people under the Basic Law, Beijing never planned to see it actualized.

We dared to confront the regime with the question: Will democracy ever be possible within such a structure? The answer was a complete crackdown on all fronts of society.

Prosecuting democratic politicians and activists across the spectrum, the case was seen as the turning point at which Hong Kong became a lost cause. People were scared into silence and forced to give up hope for democracy in Hong Kong.

Sitting in the dock, I went through the historical trials I had read about in my mind. Decades on, defiant and dignified defences seemed like natural building blocks of ultimate victory. But back in the moment, when the regime’s rule seemed infallible and change was nowhere in sight, why does one still choose to fight despite certain conviction?

The narrative put forward by the prosecution is not just a distortion of facts or a threat to the larger public. It goes much deeper – they are forcing the accused into self-denial of their lived experiences. That genuine solidarity was just a delusion. That the bonds, the togetherness, the honest conversations among people so different yet so connected, cannot be real after all. That the difficult co-building of a collective united in difference with a shared vision for a better future was just a utopian dream.

But no. They are not just idealistic dreams but realities that I have lived through. I choose to fight to prove that such connections are not only possible but have actually been lived out and continue to live on. The only delusion here is the belief that brutal oppression can ever deny their existence.

It is not a responsibility nor moral obligation. It is the strong urge within me to do justice to what I witnessed and experienced, for they constitute part of me and define who I was. And I am now going to define who I am.

I stand alone confronting these accusations, not as an individual, but as one of all those who have ever stood in the streets and raised their voices to demand autonomy for the city. As well as all those who have ever stood in the same position before unjust courts anywhere in the world.

I travelled far through words, from contemporary Russia, mainland China, Thailand, to 20th-century Chicago, Taiwan, Pretoria. I met Navalny countless times, whose cases filed with the ECtHR[*] are now open for all politically accused around the world to cite in their own legal battles. And, in this particular case, who else has more to offer than the human rights defenders in mainland China?

None of us have won our cases. Many I read about are still serving harsh sentences in unknown places, unheard and forgotten. Most of them would never have the chance to know how much they inspired me – the only way I could honour them was to fight the best fight I could. And so I did.

I was sent to solitary confinement for refuting the false testimony of a prosecution witness from the dock. Just before that I had read about Maria Kolesnikova. Her case was in closed court, but the lawyers risked their qualifications to reveal that on the day of the verdict, Kolesnikova made her final statement, a little less than three hours, about "moral choice, about love for people, about the future of Belarus.”

I tried to imagine making a speech only among people who were complicit in depriving you of your freedom, looking at their apathetic (if not mocking) faces. I can't. And yet she did. She poured her heart out in a speech she knew no one would hear a word of.

She was violently muted, but the reverberation! It went all the way across the Eurasian continent, breaking through closed courts and reporting bans, fenced walls, and censorship to reach me at the time I needed it most. I felt close to her, even though I may never meet her. I can feel her dearly.

Today, no democracy is immune to the crisis of legitimacy that results from a deficit of public trust. Calls for the "orderly" and "efficient" rule of authoritarianism are growing inexorably. News of fruitless movements and the continued plight of persecuted freedom fighters in distant, hopeless places is certainly discouraging.

But you can certainly help a lot. Defend and repair your own democracy. Push back against the corruption of power, restore faith in democratic values through action. Give authoritarian dictators one less example of failed democracy to justify their rule, and give freedom fighters around the world one more inspiration to continue the struggle with better alternatives. Fight on the ground most familiar and dear to you. Prove to the world at every possible moment, no matter how small, that democracy is worth fighting for.

For while suffering may evoke concern and compassion, it also blurs and reduces the sufferer to a pitiful but characterless victim, part of a nameless number. What really defines our identity is not the suffering itself, but the way in which we face it. It is in action that one defines oneself, and only people who truly know who they are can open up, make new connections in the most unexpected circumstances, and bring about change. It is for the wonders of human diversity, creativity, and possibility, for a world in which we can connect as our own true selves, that we dare to act, and we dare to suffer.

It is not suffering that defines identity, but how we deal with it. If today's situation is the inevitable fate of Hong Kong, at least in 2019 we chose to face it, not to remain in the village of "virtual freedom" and then leave it to future generations.

Democracy and freedom never mean tranquillity. True democracy is when voices overlap and become very loud (Hong Kong citizens should understand this correctly), and freedom is being able to choose, think, decide, and take responsibility.

If you just get indignant, support others, help them, do what is morally right without thinking about what you really want, it is difficult to perceive freedom. Freedom is the moment when you realize you "can do it". You will encounter many limitations and obstacles, but just by confronting yourself with reality you will discover who you are, and through continuous doubts about yourself, you will be able to refine a real determination.

History is not written by the winners, but by those who have will and freedom. The body of this city will not disappear, its ancient soul is dead, but the birth of a new life is inevitably painful. No one can define "what Hong Kong is", but everyone can broaden the perimeter of "what Hong Kong can be".

The choices and actions I have made are my response to "what Hong Kong can be". The joy of learning and the happiness of being able to synchronize with others beyond any difficulty are my greatest achievements. If I can continue to grow, I hope to do so.

Now, I have nothing, alone with the knowledge I have studied, with the courage I have witnessed and with the passion in which I have immersed myself. I am grateful that curiosity remains and that determination is clear. I sincerely hope that you have the courage to face yourself, to open up, to explore the world, to perceive others and not to settle for the illusion of "freedom of thought". You have to be free in the real world. "What can Hong Kong be?" I expect to see many more responses.

* journalist, sentenced to seven years in jail in Hong Kong

---

[*] European Court of Human Rights.

• hong kong
• china
• national security law
• repression
• prison
• gwyneth ho
• jimmy lai