Joshua Wong, former secretary-general of the now-defunct Demosisto, was sentenced to four years and eight months in prison in the "35+ subversion case" case and remains in custody. He was arrested in prison in June last year and charged with conspiring with Nathan Law and others to collude with foreign or overseas forces to endanger national security between July and November 2020. Wong pleaded guilty earlier to the charge and was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment at the High Court today (Nov. 5), with two months and two days of that term to run concurrently with his sentence in the other case.
In passing sentence, Judge William Tam said that after considering the defence submissions, the applicable legal principles, and the facts of the case, the court found that the offence committed by the defendant was of a "serious" nature. The judge stressed that the defendant should not be punished for his conduct or activities before the implementation of the National Security Law, or for his political beliefs; the defendant was convicted purely on the basis of his continued conspiracy with others to commit unlawful acts endangering national security after the National Security Law came into force.
The court identified seven reasons for finding the offence to be of a "serious" nature:
1. At the time of the offence, Hong Kong was facing the severe impact of social unrest and riots, and was under extremely high risk in terms of national security and the rule of law;
2. At such a critical moment, the defendant and those connected to him continued to conspire together, meeting directly with major or senior foreign officials, personnel, or institutions, or foreign forces, and openly calling on them to impose sanctions, blockades, or other hostile measures against China, the Hong Kong SAR, and its officials. They spread these calls not only through their own social media accounts but also through Western mainstream news media and institutions, reaching both local and international audiences;
3. Although the National Security Law had already been implemented, the defendant and those connected to him (including Nathan Law) continued to carry out their plan, persistently committing acts endangering national security and deliberately adjusting their respective roles to advance the relevant offences;
4. The defendant and Nathan Law played different but equally crucial roles in the conspiracy to collude with foreign governments and foreign forces. The defendant was fully aware of Nathan Law's continued calls overseas for foreign sanctions and hostile measures, while the defendant published messages and articles locally and overseas in support of such acts;
5. The defendant and Nathan Law were the masterminds or ringleaders of the case, conspiring with others to endanger national security. Nathan Law and the defendant (in a supporting role) can be regarded as the foremost advocates of colluding with foreign or overseas forces to call for sanctions and hostile measures against China and the Hong Kong SAR;
6. The defendant and Nathan Law had facilitated the imposition of sanctions and adverse measures by foreign countries and foreign entities. In any event, in the geopolitical atmosphere at the time, their persistent calls did carry the possibility of such sanctions and adverse measures being implemented;
7. The sanctions and hostile measures imposed seriously affected and endangered national security.
The judge said that "serious offence" under Article 29 of the National Security Law carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. Given all the circumstances of the case, the court considered a starting point of 13 years' imprisonment appropriate; based on the defendant's guilty plea and mitigation, the court reduced the starting point by three years and sentenced the defendant to 10 years' imprisonment, namely the minimum term required for a "serious offence" under Article 29 of the National Security Law. The court ultimately sentenced the defendant to 10 years' imprisonment and ordered that two months and two days of that term run concurrently with the remaining term of his sentence in the other case.
The judge stressed that the punishment must be commensurate with the seriousness of the offence, and that it was necessary for the court to express society's revulsion at the defendant's plan and conduct, in league with others, to collude with foreign or overseas forces to endanger national security, and to achieve the deterrent purpose of sentencing.
Related News:
Joshua Wong jailed for 10 years: Steve Li calls offence serious, welcomes court ruling
Comment