Hong Kong’s top court on Monday unanimously dismissed the bid to overturn the convictions of media mogul [Jimmy Lai](https://www.theguardian.com/world/jimmy-lai) and six other pro-democracy campaigners for an unauthorised assembly in 2019. Lai, 76, the [founder of the pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/16/jimmy-lai-editors-from-around-the-world-call-for-release-of-hong-kong-media-mogul), and six others including veteran democracy campaigner Martin Lee, had been found guilty of organising and participating in an unauthorised assembly in August 2019 during months-long pro-democracy protests in the China-ruled city. While a lower court had overturned their conviction for organising the unauthorised assembly, their conviction for taking part in an unauthorised procession was upheld. Their appeal centred on whether the conviction was proportionate to fundamental human rights protections, a principle set down in two non-binding decisions of Britain’s supreme court known as “operational proportionality”. David Neuberger, a former head of Britain’s supreme court, was one of the five judges on Hong Kong’s court of final appeal (CFA) who heard this case, adding to the debate over whether foreign judges should continue to sit on the city’s highest court amid a national security crackdown. The judgment came two months after the resignations of two British judges from the CFA, Lawrence Collins and Jonathan Sumption. Sumption said Hong Kong was becoming a totalitarian state and the city’s rule of law had been “profoundly compromised”. Beijing imposed a national security law in 2020 after months of pro-democracy protests in 2019 and the Hong Kong legislative council passed a new national security law, also known as Article 23, in March. Neuberger told Reuters in mid-June he would remain on Hong Kong’s highest court “to support the rule of law in Hong Kong, as best I can”. Lai and three former lawmakers – Lee Cheuk-yan, 67, “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung, 68, and Cyd Ho, 70 – were jailed for between eight and 18 months. Martin Lee, 86, a founding chairman of Hong Kong’s Democratic party, barrister Margaret Ng, 76, and veteran pro-democracy politician Albert Ho, 72, were given suspended sentences. Lai has been held in solitary confinement for more than three years since December 2020. He is now facing a separate [national security trial](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/02/jimmy-lai-trial-plea-not-guilty-hong-kong-democracy-advocate) and serving a sentence of five years and nine months after being convicted of violating a lease contract for his now shuttered newspaper’s headquarters. According to the Security Bureau, 301 people were arrested over acts or activities that endangered national security. Among them, 176 persons and five companies were charged.

A man in Hong Kong has pleaded guilty to sedition for wearing a T-shirt with a protest slogan, becoming the first person to be convicted under the city’s controversial national security law known as Article 23, [passed in March](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/23/hong-kongs-new-national-security-law-comes-into-force). Chu Kai-pong, 27, pleaded guilty to one count of “doing acts with seditious intent”. Under the [new security law](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/08/new-hong-kong-national-security-law-treason-life-sentence-article-23), the maximum sentence for the offence has been increased from two years to seven years in prison and could even go up to 10 years if “collusion with foreign forces” is found to be involved. [ Hong Kong journalists harassed in ‘systemic and organised attack’ ](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/13/hong-kong-journalists-harassed-systemic-organised-attack) Chu was arrested on 12 June at an MTR station for wearing a T-shirt with the slogan: “Liberate [Hong Kong](https://www.theguardian.com/world/hong-kong), revolution of our times” and a yellow mask printed with “FDNOL” – the shorthand of another slogan “five demands, not one less”. Both slogans were frequently chanted in [the huge pro-democracy protests of 2019](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/18/hong-kong-huge-rally-china-condemns-us-gross-interference). Chu, who has been held in prison for three months, told police that he wore the T-shirt to remind people of the protests, the court heard. Chief magistrate Victor So, handpicked by the city’s leader, John Lee, to hear national security cases, adjourned the case to Thursday for sentencing. Hong Kong was returned from Britain to [China](https://www.theguardian.com/world/china) in 1997 under Beijing’s promise its freedoms, including freedom of speech, would be protected under a “one country, two systems” formula. Beijing imposed a [national security law in 2020](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/21/hong-kongs-security-laws-what-are-they-and-why-are-they-so-controversial) punishing secession, subversion, terrorism or collusion with foreign forces with up to life in prison, after the months-long protests in the financial hub. It has since been used against [dozens of pro-democracy figures](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/02/we-refuse-to-disappear-the-hong-kong-47-facing-life-in-jail-after-crackdown), including journalists and former politicians. In March 2024, Hong Kong passed a second security law – [a homegrown ordinance also known as Article 23](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/25/hong-kongs-article-23-national-security-law-explained-in-30-seconds), according to its parent provision in the city’s mini constitution, the Basic Law. Authorities said both laws would be used side by side. Critics, including the US government, have expressed concerns over the new security law and said the vaguely defined provisions regarding “sedition” could be used to curb dissent. The new law expands the British colonial-era offence of sedition – which has also been increasingly used against dissidents – to include inciting hatred against China’s Communist party leadership. Hong Kong and Chinese officials claim it was necessary to plug “loopholes” in the national security regime.

A Hong Kong man has been sentenced to 14 months in jail after pleading guilty to sedition for wearing a T-shirt with a protest slogan on it. The jail term is the first handed down by the city's court under a new local national security law that was passed in March. The law, also called [Article 23](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-68508694), expands on the national security law that was imposed by Beijing in 2020. Critics feared the law could further erode civil liberties in the city, while Beijing and Hong Kong defended it, saying it was necessary for stability. Chu Kai-pong, 27, was arrested at a subway station in June wearing a T-shirt sporting the phrase "Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times". He was also wearing a mask that read "FDNOL" - initials for another slogan, "Five demands, not one less". Both slogans were frequently heard in large-scale protests in Hong Kong during the months-long anti-government demonstrations in 2019. Local media reported he was also carrying a box containing his excrement to use against people opposing his views. Chu was arrested on 12 June, the anniversary of a key date of the 2019 protests when particularly large crowds took to the city's streets. The court heard Chu told police he wore the T-shirt to remind people of the protests, according to Reuters. He was previously jailed for three months in a separate incident for wearing a T-shirt with the same slogan, as well as possession of other offensive items. Chu has been remanded in custody since 14 June. On Monday, he pleaded guilty to one count of doing an act with a seditious intention". In his judgement read out on Thursday, chief magistrate Victor So, who was handpicked by the government to hear national security cases, said Chu intended to "reignite the ideas behind" the 2019 protests. He said Chu "showed no remorse" after his previous conviction, and that the sentence reflected the "seriousness" of the sedition charge. The conviction and sentencing have been criticised by human rights groups. Amnesty International's China director Sarah Brooks described it as "a blatant attack on the right to freedom of expression", and called for the repealing of Article 23 in a statement. The sentencing comes after a landmark ruling of another case last month, when two journalists who led the pro-democracy newspaper Stand News were found guilty of sedition. That marked [the first sedition case against the city's journalists](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gq75qwve8o) since Hong Kong's handover from Britain to China in 1997.

A decade ago today Hong Kong’s Central district filled with protesters, angry at Chinese government plans to renege on a promise of a fully democratic vote. What became known as Occupy Central, or [the Umbrella protests](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/29/hong-kong-democracy-protests-china-umbrellas-police), paralysed the city’s financial centre and galvanised a generation of young people. Today Hong Kong’s streets are quiet. Protest has been largely criminalised, and many of the leaders of the Umbrella movement have been exiled, jailed or otherwise silenced. Looking back, Wendy\* remembers the feeling of that first day of Occupy. She was 25 and believed in Hong Kong’s Basic Law, and its promise to deliver universal suffrage to the people now that the territory had been returned from British to Chinese control. But instead, China’s government announced that in elections people would only be able to choose from a few candidates handpicked by a mostly pro-Beijing committee. “It seemed that the government wanted to break their promise,” Wendy tells the Guardian from Hong Kong. “So I went out.” [](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/28/i-was-so-naive-10-years-after-umbrella-protests-hongkongers-remember-chinas-crackdown#img-2) A pro-democracy activist holds a yellow umbrella in front of police in Mongkok district in November 2014. Photograph: Chris McGrath/Getty Images Protest action against Beijing’s plan had long been in the works. Three activists known as the Occupy Trio – academics Benny Tai and Chan Kin-man, and reverend Chu Yiu-ming – had for months been training a few thousand people in non-violent resistance to occupy Hong Kong’s finance district [as a last resort](https://hongkongfp.com/2019/01/12/full-transcript-umbrella-movement-convener-chan-kin-mans-testimony-trial-occupy-9/) if demands weren’t met. But student protests earlier that week had escalated to the storming of a public square, and the Occupy start date was brought forward. Thousands more joined. * **[Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email](https://www.theguardian.com/email-newsletters?CMP=copyembed)** It was 28 September. Wendy thought it would be peaceful, but stayed clear of the frontlines just in case. Then at 5:58pm, police fired teargas into the peaceful crowd. “I smelled some strange scents and my eyes got uncomfortable,” Wendy says. “I looked up to the bridge over me, seeing a group of police holding shields and stepping forward to the protesters. The scene was frightening. I just kept asking in my mind ‘Why do they treat us in that way?’.” Emily Lau, a veteran pro-democracy advocate and then a sitting legislator, had gone to speak to police earlier that day about bringing in some equipment for the Occupy Trio. Instead, they arrested her. By the time she was released later that night “the whole world had changed”. Lau and a colleague took a taxi from the police station to the top of a hill overlooking Central. “When we looked down, we were shocked because the roads were blocked and there were people just everywhere occupying Connaught Road,” she says. ‘The first step in a bigger war’ -------------------------------- The police force’s decision to use teargas on day one against a peaceful crowd had just brought more people to the streets. Soon a vast self-sufficient tent city took over the Admiralty district. Other camps formed in Mong Kok and Causeway Bay. Volunteer groups took care of provisions, sanitation, and tutoring of students, while calling for Beijing to reverse its plans and for Hong Kong’s chief executive, CY Leung, to step down. Tony\*, then a “regular office worker”, joined the camp in his lunch breaks and evenings. He describes what he saw as “astonishing”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/28/i-was-so-naive-10-years-after-umbrella-protests-hongkongers-remember-chinas-crackdown#img-3) People shield themselves from pepper spray with umbrellas as riot police clash with tens of thousands of protesters in September 2014. Photograph: Bobby Yip/REUTERS “It was a completely new Hong Kong, a beautiful Hong Kong that I had never seen before. We saw Hong Kong people were really passionate about democracy, about their future and having a say in how the city is run.” Thomas\*, a Hong Kong writer now based in London, says a lot of people got engaged in the movement for the first time because of how government and authorities had responded to their concerns. “There wasn’t any attempt \[by Beijing\] to just sort of say: I understand this isn’t quite what you want, but this is the best we can get … It was literally: thank us and love us for it, aren’t we wonderful,” he says. But as Occupy stretched on, the public’s tolerance waned and divisions deepened among protesters. The government remained unmoved, and police became more aggressive. Court injunctions ordered sections of the camps to clear, and Joshua Wong, a leader of the student protesters, ended his hunger strike. Numbers dwindled as the Trio urged people to leave, but the more radical student groups were determined to stay. “T\[he trio\] didn’t think the whole thing should drag on for so long,” says Lau. “I supported ending it because it doesn’t mean ending the whole thing. You just go home and prepare to fight another day.” It ended on 15 December after 79 days, without having achieved its stated aims and with deep fissures between pro-democracy factions, but still with a sense of hope. “There was a big banner that said ‘We will be back’,” recalls Tony. “People were hugging each other and saying farewells. There was a sense that the battle hadn’t succeeded but it might be the first step in a bigger war.” In an editorial one year later, the South China Morning Post said the outcome of the Occupy protests “proved that Beijing will not yield to confrontational tactics”. Protest leaders from both the older and [student cohorts](https://qz.com/1055810/hong-kongs-government-finally-managed-to-put-democracy-fighter-joshua-wong-behind-bars), including Tai, Chan and Wong, were eventually [convicted and jailed](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/09/hong-kong-umbrella-movement-protesters-guilty-over-pro-democracy-rallies-jail). But, Lau says, “the protests had woken up the young people”. New political parties and activist groups emerged. In June 2019, [millions took to the streets again](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/28/hong-kong-cant-go-back-to-normal-protesters-keep-umbrella-spirit-alive) in massive pro-democracy protests. Participants used tactics and strategies fine-tuned during Occupy. [](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/28/i-was-so-naive-10-years-after-umbrella-protests-hongkongers-remember-chinas-crackdown#img-4) Police use water cannon against pro-democracy protesters outside government headquarters in September 2019. Photograph: Isaac Lawrence/AFP/Getty Images But there was less of the hope and fight of 2014. Instead, the 2019 protests felt like a defiant “last cry of an animal that was dying”, says Thomas. Again Beijing did not yield, launching a crackdown that shocked even the most pessimistic observers. “The atmosphere and political reality today are totally different \[to 2014\],” says Willy Lam, a senior non-resident fellow and China specialist at the Jamestown Foundation in Washington. Wendy looks back at how she felt in 2014 and laughs a little. “I thought 2014 was shit at that time, but compared to 2019 it was just a piece of cake,” she says. “I was so naive, believing the government would be sensible, respect people’s voice, and abide by the promise in the Basic Law. But now I can say I was totally wrong.” Tony, now a lawyer based in the UK, says the Occupy protests left an important legacy, strengthening Hongkongers self-identity and their aspirations for democracy, human rights, and rule of law. “Now I see that as part of the diaspora … and I hope people in the free world don’t forget Hong Kong. There is still something to be fought for.” _\*Names have been changed upon request of interviewees_

Getty Images Hong Kong saw explosive pro-democracy protests in the last decade - but hopes for a freer city have faded in the wake of Beijing's crackdown The memories began rushing back as Kenneth strolled through Hong Kong’s Victoria Park, once a focal point for the city’s resistance to China. As a child, Kenneth would buy calligraphy posters from pro-democracy politicians at the annual Lunar New Year fair. Then there were the protest marches he joined as a teenager, that would always start here before winding their way through the city. When he was just 12, he began attending the park's massive vigils for the Tiananmen massacre - a taboo in mainland China, but commemorated openly in Hong Kong. Those vigils have ended now. The politicians’ stalls at the fair are gone, protests have been silenced and pro-democracy campaigners jailed. Kenneth feels his political coming-of-age - and Hong Kong’s - is being erased. “People still carry on with life… but you can feel the change bit by bit,” said the former activis, who did not want to reveal his real name when he spoke to us. “Our city’s character is disappearing.” On the surface Hong Kong appears to be the same, its packed trams still rumbling down bustling streets, its vibrant neon-lit chaos undimmed. But look closer and there are signs the city has changed - from the skyscrapers lighting up every night with exultations of China, the motherland, to the chatter of mainland Mandarin increasingly heard alongside Hong Kong’s native Cantonese. It’s impossible to know how many of Hong Kong’s more than seven million people welcome Beijing’s grip. But hundreds of thousands have taken part in protests in the past decade since a pro-democracy movement erupted in 2014. Not everyone supported it, but few would argue Beijing crushed it. As a turbulent decade draws to a close, hopes for a freer Hong Kong have withered. China says it has steadied a volatile city. Hundreds have been jailed under a sweeping national security law (NSL), which also drove thousands of disillusioned and wary Hongkongers abroad, including activists who feared or fled arrest. Others, like Kenneth, have stayed and keep a low profile. But in many of them lives the memory of a freer Hong Kong - a place they are fighting to remember in defiance of Beijing’s remaking of their city. Getty Images Thousands occupied the streets of Hong Kong during the 2014 protests, which earned the names Umbrella Movement and Occupy Central When Hong Kong, a former British colony, was returned to China in 1997, it was under the assurance that the city would keep some rights, including free speech, freedom of assembly and rule of law for 50 years. But as Beijing’s power grew, so did the disquiet within the city’s pro-democracy camp. In September 2014, tens of thousands of protesters began to stage mass sit-ins in downtown Hong Kong, demanding fully democratic elections. It propelled a new generation of pro-democracy campaigners to prominence - such as Joshua Wong, then a 17-year-old student, and Benny Tai, a college professor, who called the movement Occupy Central. It also seeded the ground for more explosive protests in 2019, which were triggered by Beijing’s proposal to extradite locals to the mainland. The plan was scrapped but the protests intensified over several months as calls grew for more democracy, becoming the most serious challenge to Beijing’s authority in Hong Kong. “Without Benny Tai, there would have been no Occupy Central,” says Chan Kin-man, who co-founded the campaign with Tai and Reverend Chu Yiu-ming. “He had the temper of scholars and spoke his mind… that’s why he was bold enough to push for changes and think about big ideas. It is always people \[like this\] who change history.” Getty Images Chu, Tai (centre) and Chan were at the forefront of the Occupy Central movement in 2014 Chan Kin-man In 2013 the trio celebrated Tai's birthday, holding up a birthday gift of wood carvings spelling out "persevere, peace, love" Chan and Rev Chu are both exiles in Taiwan now. Chan moved to Taipei in 2021, after serving 11 months in jail for inciting public nuisance in his role in Occupy Central. He is now a fellow at a local research institute. Tai is still in Hong Kong, where he will spend the next decade behind bars. Earlier this month he was sentenced to jail for subversion, [along with more than 40 other pro-democracy campaigners](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2l4eynl4zo) including Wong, many of whom have been in jail since their arrest in early 2021. As Wong left the courtroom, he shouted: “I love Hong Kong.” The following day 76-year-old billionaire Jimmy Lai, a fierce critic of China, testified at his trial for allegedly colluding with foreign forces. Frail but defiant, he told the court his now-defunct newspaper Apple Daily had only espoused the values of Hong Kong’s people: “Pursuit of democracy and freedom of speech”. The trials have passed quietly, in stark contrast to the events that led to them. Small signs of protest outside the court were quickly shut down - a woman sobbing about her son’s sentence was taken away by police. Beijing defends the restrictions - including the NSL under which the trials are happening - as essential for stability. It says the West or its allies have no right to question its laws or how it applies them. But critics accuse China of reneging on the deal it struck in 1997. They say it has weakened the city’s courts and muzzled the once resounding cry for democracy in Hong Kong. BBC Chinese / Joy Chang Chan has been living in Taipei since 2021 Chan has watched these events unfold from afar with a heavy heart. After 2014, there had still been the possibility of change, he said. Now, “a lot of things have become impossible… Hong Kong has become no different from other Chinese cities”. Faced with this reality after campaigning for democracy for more than a decade, “you can say that I have failed in everything I have done in my life”, he said with a wry smile. But still he perseveres. Besides teaching classes on Chinese society, he is writing a book about Occupy Central, collecting items for an archive of Hong Kong’s protest scene, organising conferences, and giving virtual lectures on democracy and politics. These efforts “make me feel that I haven’t given up on Hong Kong. I don’t feel like I have abandoned it”. Yet, there are moments when he grapples with his decision to leave. He is happier in Taiwan, but he also feels “a sense of loss”. “Am I still together with other Hongkongers, facing the same challenges as them?” Getty Images Hong Kong's iconic trams still rumble down the streets... Getty Images And its neon-lit chaos remains undimmed “If you are not breathing the air here, you don’t really know what’s happening… if you don’t feel the pulse here, it means you are truly gone,” said Kenneth, as he continued his walk through Victoria Park. With friends leaving the city in droves in the last few years, he has lost count of the number of farewell parties he’s attended. Still, he insists on staying: “This is where my roots are.” What irritates him is the rhetoric from those who leave, that the Hong Kong they knew has died. “Hong Kong continues to exist. Its people are still here! So how can they say that Hong Kong is dead?" But, he acknowledged, there have been dramatic changes. Hongkongers now have to think twice about what they say out loud, Kenneth said. Many are now adapting to a “normalised state of surveillance”. There are red lines, “but it is very difficult to ascertain them”. Instead of campaigning openly, activists now write petition letters. Rallies, marches and protests are definitely off-limits, he added. But many, like Kenneth, are wary of taking part in any activism, because they fear they’ll be arrested. A [t-shirt](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0m0v99pd3vo), [social media posts](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2qq47qdqwlo) and [picture books](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64985527) have fallen foul of the law recently, landing their owners in jail for sedition. Getty Images Victoria Park once hosted annual vigils for victims of the Tiananmen massacre Getty Images A recent mid-autumn festival celebration in the park marked the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China These days Kenneth goes out less frequently. “The contrast is so drastic now. I don’t want to remember what happened in the past.” Still, as he walked out of the park and headed to the Admiralty district, more memories unspooled. As he neared the government headquarters, he pointed to the spot where he choked on tear gas for the first time, on 28 September 2014. That day, the police fired 87 rounds of tear gas on unarmed protesters, an act that enraged demonstrators and galvanised the pro-democracy movement. As the protests deepened and tear gas became a common sight, many sheltered behind umbrellas, spawning a new moniker - the Umbrella Movement. Getty Images Kenneth choked on tear gas on 28 September 2014 when police fired it on protesters The final stop was his alma mater, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, also known as PolyU. It was a key battleground during the 2019 demonstrations that saw protesters battling police on the streets, hurling projectiles against tear gas, water cannons and rubber bullets. Five years on, the PolyU entrance where students fended off the police with bricks and petrol bombs in a fiery showdown has been reconstructed. A fountain which saw the most intense clashes has been demolished. Like elsewhere in Hong Kong, the campus seemed to have been scrubbed of its disobedient past. Kenneth believed it was because the university “doesn’t want people to remember certain things". Then, he darted away to a quiet corner. Hidden beneath the bushes was a low wall pockmarked with holes and gobs of concrete. It was impossible to tell what they were. But Kenneth believes these were traces of the battles which escaped the purge of memories. “I don’t believe we will forget what happened,” he said. “Forgetting the past is a form of betrayal.” BBC Chinese / Lok Lee The pockmarked wall made of PolyU's trademark red bricks BBC Chinese / Lok Lee Kenneth keeps a secret collection of protest memorabilia At a Tesco’s café in Watford in the UK, Kasumi Law remembered what she missed about her old home. “I never thought I’d love the sea in Hong Kong so much. I only realised this when I arrived in the UK,” she said, as she tucked into a full English breakfast. Unlike the cold and dark ocean surrounding Britain, “in Hong Kong the sea is so shiny, because there are so many buildings… I didn’t realise how beautiful our city is”. Kasumi’s decision to move to the UK with her husband and young daughter had stemmed from an unease that crept up on her over the previous decade. The Occupy Central protests began just months after her daughter was born in 2014. In the following years, as Beijing's grip appeared to tighten - [student activists were jailed](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-40957422) and [booksellers disappeared](https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-35219260) - Kasumi's discomfort grew. “Staying in Hong Kong was, I wouldn’t say, unsafe,” she said. “But every day, little by little, there was a feeling of something not being right.” Then Hong Kong erupted in protest again in 2019. As Beijing cracked down, the UK offered a visa scheme for Hongkongers born before the 1997 handover, and Kasumi and her husband agreed it was time to go for the sake of their daughter. They settled in the town of Watford near London, where her husband found a job in IT while Kasumi became a stay-at-home mum. But she had never lived abroad before, and she struggled with a deep homesickness which she documented in emotional video diaries on YouTube. One of them even went viral last year, striking a chord with some Hongkongers while others criticised her for choosing to emigrate. Kasumi Law One of Kasumi's happiest memories is playing with her dog Glory at Lamma Island in Hong Kong Youtube / Kasumi Law A screenshot from Kasumi's viral video about her difficulty adjusting to life in the UK Eventually it was too much to bear, and she returned to Hong Kong for a visit last year. Over two months she visited childhood haunts like a theme park and a science museum, scoffed down her mum’s homecooked fuzzy melon with vermicelli and stir fried clams, and treated herself to familiar delights such as egg tarts and melon-flavoured soy milk. But the Hong Kong she remembered had also changed. Her mum looked older. Her favourite shops in the Ladies Market had closed down. Sitting by the harbour at Tsim Sha Tsui one night, she was happy to be reunited with the twinkling sea she had missed so much. Then she realised most of the people around her were speaking in Mandarin. Tears streamed down her face. “When I looked out at the sea it looked familiar, but when I looked around at the people around me, it felt strange.” Kasumi wonders when she would visit again. With the passing of [a new security law this year - Article 23](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-68508694) - her friends have advised her to delete social media posts from past protests before returning. It is a far cry from the fearlessness she remembers from 2019, when she brought her daughter to the protests and they marched on the streets with thousands of people, united in their defiance. Getty Images A familiar sight in the 2019 protests: demonstrators' raised hands, symbolising their five demands “It’s too late to turn back,” she said. “I feel if I go back to Hong Kong I might not be used to life there, to be honest. “My daughter is happy here. When I see her, I think it’s worth it. I want her world to be bigger.” Kasumi’s world is bigger too - she has found a job and made new friends. But even as she builds a new life in the UK, she remains determined to preserve the Hongkonger in her - and her child. Kasumi and her husband only speak in Cantonese to their daughter, and the family often watches Cantonese films together. Her daughter doesn’t yet understand the significance of the 2019 protests she marched in, nor the movement that began in 2014, when she was born. But Kasumi plans to explain when she is older. The seeds Kasumi is planting are already taking root. She is particularly proud of the way her daughter responds to people who call her Chinese. “She gets angry, and she will argue with them,” Kasumi said, with a smile. “She always tells people, ‘I’m not Chinese, I’m a Hongkonger'." Hong Kong protests: A city's identity crisis Read more about Hong Kong -------------------------

Hong Kong’s flagship airline, Cathay Pacific, has apologised over the inclusion of a Family Guy episode in its inflight entertainment system that features a scene depicting Tiananmen Square. The airline [told the South China Morning Post](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3289257/hong-kongs-cathay-says-sorry-removes-family-guy-episode-tiananmen-tank-man-scene) it had apologised to customers after a complaint was raised on social media that the episode might breach Hong Kong’s [national security laws](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/19/hong-kong-47-hk47-sentencing-national-security-trial). “We emphasise that the programme’s content does not represent Cathay Pacific’s standpoint and have immediately arranged to have the programme removed as soon as possible,” a spokesperson for the carrier told the outlet. The US animated comedy series is known for pushing boundaries and sensitivities. In the seven-second scene, main character Peter Griffin is depicted standing next to a protester in front of a line of Chinese tanks – mirroring famous scenes of an unknown individual now known as “Tank Man” that were captured during the Chinese military massacre of student protesters on 4 June 1989 in Beijing. Cathay Pacific told SCMP it had ordered its third-party provider to thoroughly investigate and strengthen oversight. The Tiananmen massacre is one of the most sensitive topics inside [China](https://www.theguardian.com/world/china) and is strictly censored. For three decades Hong Kong hosted an annual vigil, with sometimes hundreds of thousands attending to mourn the victims by candlelight. However in the aftermath of pro-democracy protests in 2019, Hong Kong and Chinese authorities launched a sweeping crackdown on opposition and dissent, and introduced draconian national security legislation. People attempting to organise or attend Tiananmen vigils of any size since 2020 have been prosecuted, although some government officials say private markings of the date are acceptable. The crackdown has targeted activism and politics, as well as academia and culture in Hong Kong. Any depiction or reference to the protests or related subjects are considered highly sensitive. In January, Amazon Prime’s blockbuster TV series – Expats – was [released everywhere except in the city it was set](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/29/amazon-the-expats-series-not-available-in-hong-kong-where-it-is-set), Hong Kong. The series featured scenes from the 2014 protest movement. And in 2021, Disney+ launched in Hong Kong, but with a missing episode from [The Simpsons](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/29/disney-channel-launches-in-hong-kong-without-the-simpsons-tiananmen-square-episode). The missing episode depicted Tiananmen Square, and a plaque that reads “On this site, in 1989, nothing happened”.

A Hong Kong judge has convicted seven people, including a pro-democracy former lawmaker, of rioting during mob violence at a subway station at the height of the city’s [anti-government protests in July 2019](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/21/hong-kong-mass-china-extradition-bill-demonstrations-protestors). Prosecutors accused the former legislator Lam Cheuk-ting and six other defendants of [provoking members of a group of about 100 men](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/26/hong-kong-pro-democracy-lawmakers-arrested-over-2019-yuen-long-protests) armed with wooden poles and metal rods who attacked protesters and bystanders at a train station. The men, all clad in white shirts in contrast to the black worn by protesters, claimed to be protecting their homeland in Yuen Long, a residential district in Hong Kong‘s New Territories. Dozens of people, including Lam, were injured in the violence, a key chapter that escalated the protest movement as the public criticised police for their delayed response. The landmark ruling could shape the city’s historical narrative of the incident. Judge Stanley Chan ruled that Lam was not acting as a mediator as he had claimed, but rather was trying to exploit the situation for political gain. He said Lam’s words, directed at the white-shirted men, had “fanned the flames”. The seven defendants are expected to be sentenced in February. Several members of the public sitting in the gallery cried after hearing the verdicts. Others waved at the defendants, with one shouting to Lam, “Hang in there, Ting!” The prosecution alleged the defendants had either berated the white-shirted men, used obscene hand gestures, hurled objects or shot jets of water at them with a hosepipe. The defendants had pleaded not guilty to the rioting charge. During the trial, Lam said he chose to go to Yuen Long because he hoped his then position as a lawmaker could pressure the police to act quickly. He said he could not leave the scene while fellow residents were in danger. Some defendants who targeted the white-shirted men with a hosepipe argued that they were trying to stop the attackers from advancing. Chan, the judge, rejected the arguments of some defendants that they acted in self defence. The 2019 protests were sparked by a [proposed extradition law](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/07/the-last-fight-for-hong-kong-activists-gear-up-to-protest-extradition-law) that would have allowed criminal suspects in Hong Kong to be sent to the mainland for trial. The government withdrew the bill, but the protesters widened their demands to include direct elections for the city’s leaders and police accountability. The social movement was the biggest challenge to the Hong Kong government since the former British colony returned to Chinese rule in 1997. In response, Beijing imposed a [national security law in 2020](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/china-passes-controversial-hong-kong-national-security-law), leading to the arrest of many activists. Others were silenced or went into exile. In November, Lam was sentenced to six years and nine months in jail in the city’s biggest national security case. More than 10,000 people were arrested in connection to the protests for various crimes, such as rioting and participating in an unauthorised assembly. About 10 white-shirted men were convicted in other cases related to the mob violence in July 2019, local media reported.

Four people jailed in the landmark national security trial of the “[Hong Kong](https://www.theguardian.com/world/hong-kong) 47”, the pro-democracy figures accused of conspiracy to commit subversion, were freed on Friday after more than four years behind bars, the second group to be released in a month. Among those freed was longtime political and LGBTQ activist Jimmy Sham, who also led one of Hong Kong’s largest pro-democracy groups, the Civil Human Rights Front, which disbanded in 2021. CHRF was one of the largest pro-democracy groups in the former British colony and helped to organise million-strong marches during pro-democracy protests in 2019. [ Activists, professors, legislators: who are the Hong Kong 47? ](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/19/who-are-the-hong-kong-47-hk47-trial-pro-democracy-activists) The others who were released were Kinda Li, Roy Tam and Henry Wong. Local media reported some of the four arriving at their homes early on Friday. Sham told reporters he would see them “in the afternoon”. “I want to reserve some time for my family,” he said in Cantonese, according to Hong Kong Free Press. Li reportedly thanked gathered reporters “for the hard work” before moving inside. The four are the second group of the Hong Kong 47 to be released. At the end of April, former pro-democracy lawmakers Claudia Mo, Kwok Ka-ki, Jeremy Tam and Gary Fan were [released from three separate prisons](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/29/hong-kong-47-four-pro-democracy-lawmakers-released-from-jail) across Hong Kong around dawn. The 47 pro-democracy campaigners were arrested and charged in early 2021 with conspiracy to commit subversion under a Beijing-imposed national law which carried sentences of up to life in prison. Forty-five of these were convicted after a marathon trial, with sentences of up to 10 years. Only two were acquitted. The democrats were found guilty of organising an unofficial “primary election” in 2020 to select candidates for a legislative election. Prosecutors accused the activists of plotting to paralyse the government by winning a majority of seats and blocking government bills to force a dissolution. . The election was postponed, and rescheduled after an electoral overhaul that ensured only pro-Beijing “patriots” could run. Human rights groups and some western governments including the US called the trial politically motivated and had demanded the democrats be freed. Hong Kong and Beijing, however, say all are equal under the national security laws and the democrats received a fair trial. Since large and sustained pro-democracy protests erupted in Hong Kong for most of 2019, China has cracked down on the democratic opposition as well as liberal civil society and media outlets under [sweeping national security laws](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/23/hong-kongs-new-national-security-law-comes-into-force) that have broadly criminalised dissenting behaviours, including benign acts of protest.

Hong Kong police have accused a mobile game application of advocating armed revolution and promoting secessionist agendas HONG KONG -- Hong Kong police on Tuesday accused a mobile game application of advocating armed revolution and promoting secessionist agendas, saying that those who publish it or share it with others online may risk violating [national security laws](https://apnews.com/article/hong-kong-new-security-law-explainer-633e91d7d3aef09381b349282a7dec1f). The announcement — the first to publicly denounce a gaming app — indicates that authorities are widening the crackdown that has followed [anti-government protests in 2019](https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-laws-international-news-photography-hong-kong-f301c03e63f0e75d2e17104ad2c53f34). Authorities have crushed or [silenced many dissenting voices](https://apnews.com/article/hong-kong-47-activists-families-fe313c1a245f6b95b9fbb99a83b3ec36) through prosecutions under the [2020 national security law](https://apnews.com/article/hong-kong-europe-business-5a7f50d5d5027fda34f9addeb883e809) imposed by Beijing and a similar, homegrown law enacted last year. In [a statement](https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202506/10/P2025061000697.htm?fontSize=1), police warned residents against downloading the “Reversed Front: Bonfire" application, saying those with the app installed might be seen as possessing a publication with a seditious intention. They also warned people against providing financial assistance to the application developer, including making in-app purchases. “'Reversed Front: Bonfire' was released under the guise of a game with the aim of promoting secessionist agendas such as ‘Taiwan independence’ and ‘Hong Kong independence,’ advocating armed revolution and the overthrow of the fundamental system of the People’s Republic of China,” police said. The game application was developed by ESC Taiwan, which did not immediately respond to The Associated Press' request for comment. On the application's Facebook page, the developer posted about surging searches for the game name and a Hong Kong broadcaster’s news report about Tuesday’s development. According to the application’s introduction, players can assume the role of Hong Kong, Tibet, Uyghur, [Taiwan](https://apnews.com/hub/taiwan) or Cathaysian Rebel factions, among others, to overthrow the communist regime. They may also choose to lead the communists to defeat all enemies. The game’s website says it “is a work of nonfiction. Any similarity to actual agencies, policies or ethnic groups of the PRC in this game is intentional.” On Tuesday night, the app was still available on Apple's App Store but not on the Google Play store. The game publisher last month said Google Play had taken the app down because it did not prohibit users from adopting hateful language in naming. Apple, Google and Meta have not immediately commented. After playing the game for about three months, Kuo Hao Fu in Taiwan said he found that its content uses a humorous approach to describe serious political issues. Fu disagreed with the police accusations, saying players can also choose to be part of the force representing China. “The Hong Kong police's actions demonstrate how Hong Kong's democratic freedoms have been controlled by the Chinese Communist Party,” he said. “When even this level cannot be tolerated, it completely destroys creative freedom in gaming.” China considers Taiwan its own territory, to be brought under its control by force if necessary. Many Taiwanese in the self-ruled island showed concerns about Hong Kong's declining freedoms under Beijing's grip. The Beijing and Hong Kong governments insist the city's national security laws were necessary to return stability to the city following the protests.

Teachers in [Hong Kong](https://www.theguardian.com/world/hong-kong) have been warned to keep themselves and students away from any US Independence Day celebrations as they may breach national security laws, educators have alleged. A text message purportedly sent by the principal of a Hong Kong school to staff said the education bureau’s regional education office had reminded them “to be careful about Independence Day activities organised by the US consulate in Hong Kong, and not to participate to avoid violating the national security law and Hong Kong laws”. The text was published on Edu Lancet, a Facebook page run by a former manager at the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority, Hans Yeung. It urged staff to be diligent in “protecting” any students who were considering participating, and to discourage them. Another email shared on Edu Lancet, and seen independently by the Guardian, told faculty staff that any teacher who received an invitation from an embassy or a foreign organisation funded by an embassy must seek permission to attend from the principal for the purpose of “maintaining national security”. The Hong Kong education bureau did not confirm or deny the claims in response to questions from the Guardian, but in a statement said it had enacted policies to help schools “effectively prevent and suppress acts and activities that endanger or are detrimental to national security. “Schools have the responsibility to play a good gatekeeper role and to enhance the sensitivity of teachers and students to national security.” The bureau had enacted “clear guidelines” for schools that required them to “establish school-based mechanisms and formulate appropriate measures, according to their own circumstances and needs, to implement various tasks related to safeguarding national security and national security education”, it added. The bureau did not answer questions about what laws would be broken by attending any Fourth of July event, or whether such warnings only applied to the US holiday. The US Consulate in Hong Kong has been contacted for comment. Edu Lancet and Yeung, who runs the page to voice concerns from those working with the education system and “expose the current problems”, have been criticised by the Hong Kong government in the past for their posts. The security secretary, Chris Tang, has accused Yeung of “making incitements” from his current home in the UK. The purported directives fit in with tightening restrictions on Hong Kong’s education system, and a push to have the curriculum focus more on national security amid increased control of the city by the Chinese government. After pro-democracy protests rocked the city in 2019, the ruling Chinese Communist party imposed a national security law on Hong Kong that broadly outlawed acts of dissent and opposition as violations against the state. In 2020, the then chief executive, Carrie Lam, [blamed the education system](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/11/carrie-lam-blames-hong-kong-education-system-for-fuelling-protests) for fuelling the protests, setting the tone for an overhaul that is ongoing. The Hong Kong government [has since altered](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/09/hong-kong-schools-in-crisis-as-teachers-and-students-flee-toxic-political-climate) the [school curriculum](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/05/lets-learn-about-national-security-hong-kong-releases-video-for-young-children) to include [teachings on national security](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/15/hong-kong-national-security-children-new-laws) in subjects such as [English language](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/education/article/3313909/english-lessons-hong-kong-primary-schools-cover-national-security), music, maths and sport, and to focus more on [patriotic education](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/24/hong-kong-to-restructure-primary-education-to-make-it-more-patriotic). It has also banned texts it sees as endangering national security, including a picture book about sheep created by the city’s physiotherapists union, [and prosecuted authors](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/07/hong-kong-authors-of-childrens-books-sheep-wolves-convicted-of-sedition). Teachers in Hong Kong have previously [told the Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/09/hong-kong-schools-in-crisis-as-teachers-and-students-flee-toxic-political-climate) they felt pressure to self-censor for fear of being reported for remarks seen as unpatriotic. Since the start of the 2023-24 school year, all new teachers in public sector schools, direct subsidy scheme schools and kindergartens must sit an exam on Hong Kong’s mini constitution, the Basic Law, and the national security law. Hong Kong’s education minister, Christine Choi, has [repeatedly warned of “soft resistance” in schools](https://www.thestandard.com.hk/hong-kong-news/article/304850/Education-chief-warns-of-soft-resistance-in-schools), and this month said educators had to be vigilant against the infiltration of “hostile forces” through events such as book fairs and extracurricular activities which “could include undesirable reading materials”. _Additional reporting by Jason Tzu Kuan Lu_