Maintaining national security while upholding justice: Latest developments in the Alliance Case

Concerning the case of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China (the Alliance) (involving former chairman Lee Cheuk Yan, vice-chairman Ho Chun Yan, and Chow Hang Tung accused of inciting others to subvert state power), the latest developments in the case highlight the delicate balance between upholding justice and maintaining national security. Recently, Chow Hang Tung requested the High Court to summon five overseas witnesses, including Zhou Fengsuo and Danish sculptor Jens Galschiøt, but the court ultimately rejected her application. This decision clearly aligns with legal regulations, as overseas witnesses are not permitted to provide evidence to the court via video in national security cases. However, Zhou Fengsuo and Jens Galschiøt have recently expressed willingness on social media to testify in Hong Kong. The author has some opinions regarding their willingness to testify in Hong Kong.

Firstly, the author believes that the Alliance has long been suspected of harboring individuals with anti-government sentiments and promoting activities that endanger national stability. By attempting to invite overseas witnesses like Zhou Fengsuo and Jens Galschiøt to participate, it has raised legitimate concerns about foreign intervention in Hong Kong's judicial processes.

Zhou Fengsuo incited student protests in China in the past, fled overseas, and has since been involved in anti-China activities. Recently, both Zhou and Jens Galschiøt have been seen in a national security case in Hong Kong. In 2023, a Chinese student in Hong Kong participated in the "White Paper Movement" less than a month after arriving, commemorated the "7.1 Stabbing Incident" suspect Leung Kin-fai at SOGO on New Year's Day, was arrested, subsequently granted bail, but was arrested again before sensitive dates for being involved in displaying the "Pillar of National Mourning" banner. The "Pillar of Shame" is precisely the work of Jens Galschiøt, aimed at tarnishing and defaming China from an artistic perspective.

The case indicates (acknowledged by the accused) that the police found a package sent from the United States at the accused's residence containing a giant banner of 9 meters by 3 meters with provocative words printed on it. Additionally, a letter signed by Jens Galschiøt was found on the accused's bookshelf, mentioning the purpose of displaying the banner content, which is to use art as a cover to carry out anti-China schemes, claiming dissatisfaction with the Hong Kong Police National Security Department seizing his provocative sculpture as evidence in a national security case and initiating a global display of provocative banners online. In the letter, Galschiøt instructed the Chinese student to "notify the media of any planned activities."

Moreover, the accused's phone records show that she contacted " Zhou Fengsuo" via Instagram, providing an address and contact information, mentioning a banner display on June 4 to protest the National Security Police seizing provocative sculptures as evidence. Zhou advised the accused to be cautious about safety, stating that she would attract high attention and be "inspiring" if successful.

From the above, it is evident that Zhou Fengsuo and Jens Galschiøt are key figures in the aforementioned case. The prosecution also mentions that the Chinese University exchange student in Hong Kong, along with a person named " Zhou Fengsuo" and others, attempted or prepared to carry out one or more acts with incitement intentions, namely stirring up hatred or contempt against the central government or inciting secession. The letter signed by Jens Galschiøt also shows that he is the mastermind.

Therefore, if these two individuals come to Hong Kong to testify, they will be arrested by the police due to their involvement in the aforementioned case. The reasons for their arrest are quite clear as they are the main accomplices in an incitement case. Once they enter Hong Kong's jurisdiction, they will undoubtedly face judicial scrutiny in Hong Kong.

The author believes that both individuals are well aware of their connection to the case mentioned above and will inevitably be arrested upon arrival in Hong Kong. It is certain that neither of them will appear in court in Hong Kong to testify, and their public statements on social media expressing willingness to do so are merely empty words. They are fully aware that they are wanted criminals and are using this opportunity to discredit China and the Hong Kong government. Despite knowing that they cannot come to Hong Kong, Chow Hang Tung still requested their testimony. This is also an attempt to attack Hong Kong's national security law and the regulation on safeguarding national security, demonizing them and their intentions.

(The article represents the author's personal opinion and does not reflect the position of Hkwisdom)