A Hong Kong man who threw anti-government leaflets from his public housing flat has been sentenced to 10 months in prison after pleading guilty to committing seditious acts.

Raymond Wong appeared at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday to receive a 10-month jail sentence handed down by Chief Magistrate Victor So for two counts of “doing with a seditious intention an act or acts that had a seditious intention,” local media reported.

Wong, a 55-year-old construction worker, admitted to throwing the leaflets from his unit in On Tat Estate, Kwun Tong, on two occasions in October 2024 and December 2025.

He was arrested in April, and the following month, he pleaded guilty to the charges –  an offence under Hong Kong’s homegrown national security law, also known as Article 23.

In mitigation, he apologised to his girlfriend and his daughter, as their public housing unit would be reclaimed by the government due to his offence.

Citing a psychological report, Wong’s lawyers said that the defendant did not know how to control the resentment that had built up from losing his full-time job after the 2019 protests and the Covid-19 pandemic.

‘Premeditated and planned’

Noting that the leaflets were thrown after National Day two years ago and before last year’s Legislative Council (LegCo) elections, Magistrate So said that Wong’s actions were “premeditated and planned to some degree.”

On October 2, 2024, Kwun Tong district councillor Hsu Yau-wai reported 41 sheets of paper to the police after finding them on the podium of Lai Tat House at the estate. The papers had slogans on them saying “kill police” and derogatory remarks about mainland Chinese people.

On December 5 last year, two days ahead of the “patriots only” LegCo polls, a property manager found papers scattered near that same area, with written slogans such as “Liberate Hong Kong, do not vote.”

Wong’s lawyers said on Tuesday that his methods were “primitive” and had limited impact compared with online posts.

So said he accepted the defence’s argument but pointed out that Wong explicitly incited people to kill police officers, mainland Chinese, and government officials.

Wong incited enmity towards the police and referred to mainland residents with “derogatory” and “dehumanising” language, and his use of the slogan “Liberate Hong Kong,” considered secessionist under Beijing’s national security law in Hong Kong, also challenged national sovereignty, the magistrate added.

Calls to boycott the LegCo polls also amounted to an effort to undermine public confidence in the city’s electoral system, So said.

The turnout for last year’s polls was the second-lowest on record, at 31.9 per cent. Beijing overhauled the city’s electoral system in 2021 to ensure that only those deemed patriotic enough can run.

The move reduced democratic representation in the legislature, tightened control of elections and introduced requirements for candidates to obtain nominations from a small circle of political elites.

The US consulate in Hong Kong displayed commemorative candles in its windows on the 37th anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown on Thursday, while other diplomatic missions paid tribute with social media posts.

The annual move is often blasted by local and Chinese authorities, and has been cited by Beijing as “evidence” of foreign interference in a 6,300-word “fact sheet.”

Hundreds, perhaps thousands, died when the People’s Liberation Army cracked down on protesters around Beijing’s Tiananmen Square in 1989.

Hong Kong used to be one of the few places on Chinese soil where annual vigils were held to commemorate the people who died in the 1989 crackdown.

But police banned the gathering at Victoria Park for the first time in 2020, citing Covid-19 restrictions, and imposed the same ban the following year.

No official commemoration has been held since the vigil organiser, the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, disbanded in September 2021. Its leaders were arrested and are currently on trial.

Currently occupying Victoria Park – historically the site of Hong Kong’s vigils – is a five-day patriotic carnival organised by pro-Beijing groups.

Diplomatic commemorations

Earlier on Thursday, Britain’s embassy in China shared a social media post featuring an animation with scenes from the bloody crackdown. It was shared without commentary.

The British consulate in Hong Kong posted a reel of a mobile phone held aloft with its torch on, apparently referencing the candlelit vigils.

Washington’s mission in Beijing shared a quote from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stating: “Those who sacrificed to uphold their unalienable rights of free expression and peaceful assembly will be vindicated someday.”

In response, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said Beijing had “long since reached a clear conclusion regarding that political turmoil that occurred in the late 1980s.”

The Canadian consulate in Hong Kong shared a Facebook post, which read: “Today, Canadians honour the memory of all who lost their lives, were injured or went missing during the Tiananmen Square crackdown on June 4, 1989. Canada stands with the survivors and the families and loved ones who continue to demand accountability.”

Meanwhile, the Australian consulate in Hong Kong shared on Facebook a photo of candles and a statement reading: “Today, we stand with communities worldwide in remembering those who lost their lives at Tiananmen Square on 4 June 1989. Australia remains steadfast in its commitment to upholding human rights, including freedom of association, of expression, and of political participation.”

In June 2019, then-leader Carrie Lam said that the city’s annual vigils were “proof that Hong Kong is a free place.”

A Hong Kong court is now hearing a landmark trial of the Alliance and two vigil leaders, Chow Hang-tung and  Lee Cheuk-yan. They are accused of “inciting subversion” under the national security law, an offence that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years behind bars. 

Another vigil leader – Albert Ho – pleaded guilty when the trial opened in January.

The Hong Kong government has proposed allowing the chief executive to certify any criminal act as a national security case, in a legal update that would be binding on the courts.

New subsidiary legislation under Article 23 – Hong Kong’s homegrown national security ordinance – will empower the city’s leader to certify “other offences endangering national security under the law of the HKSAR,” according to a proposal submitted to the Legislative Council (LegCo) on Monday by the Security Bureau and the Department of Justice.

The government proposed that the subsidiary legislation would be enacted through a “negative vetting” procedure, allowing it to be gazetted before being tabled at LegCo for scrutiny. It cited a “complicated geopolitical landscape” for the update.

The “legislative intent” of the Beijing-imposed national security law, which came into effect on June 30, 2020, is that offences endangering national security include not only the four types of offences under the Beijing-imposed national security law but also “other offences endangering national security under the law of the HKSAR,” the government’s proposal said.

The chief executive is already empowered to issue certificates to decide whether an act involves national security, but the new subsidiary legislation aims to “bring greater certainty” to the courts. There will no longer be room to debate whether an ordinary crime could face national security procedures when a certificate is issued.

Plus, later offences connected to an act classified as a national security offence would also face national security procedures, under the new plan.

“The subsidiary legislation does not involve the creation of any new criminal offence, penalty or enforcement power,” the document said.

‘Any act’ can be reclassified

Under the proposal, the chief executive will be granted the power to declare that any act involved in a criminal offence case concerns national security. The leader may then issue a certificate: “[T]hen the case is a case concerning [an] offence endangering national security” under the Beijing-imposed national security law or Article 23,” the proposal says.

“If a person is charged with any offence endangering national security, and is charged with or convicted of any alternative offence in respect of the same act in the same case, such alternative offence is also an offence endangering national security.”

Once a case, or an offence, is certified as endangering national security, the procedures stipulated in Article 23 or the national security law for handling such cases will be applicable.

The national security law allows handpicked judges and closed-door hearings for national security cases, trials without juries, and a higher bar for bail.

The Panel on Security and the Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services will hold a joint meeting later on Monday to discuss the proposed subsidiary legislation.

Ming Pao reported on Sunday that some lawmakers were notified that such a meeting would be held the following day.

A 55-year-old man has pleaded guilty to making and distributing “seditious” materials, including ones that called for a boycott of the “patriots only” legislative elections last year.

Raymond Wong, a construction worker, was charged and brought to the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Thursday afternoon.

He was arrested by national security police on April 21, a government statement said on Thursday. His arrest was not known to the public before, as police did not issue information about it at the time.

Wong was charged with two counts of “doing with a seditious intention an act or acts that had a seditious intention,” an offence under Hong Kong’s homegrown national security law, also known as Article 23.

According to a court document, Wong allegedly made “paper sheets written with statements” and threw them “into a public space” from a 12th-floor flat in On Tat Estate, a public housing estate in Kwun Tong. The first count of the sedition offence was dated October 2, 2024, and the second one was dated December 5, 2025.

Local media reported that on October 2, 2024, a Kwun Tong district councillor found pieces of paper with phrases including “blow up corrupt police officers” scattered on the estate’s podium. The district councillor called the police and handed over 41 sheets of paper.

On December 5 last year, two days before the “patriots only” Legislative Council elections, a staff member at the estate’s property management company found sheets of paper reading “liberate Hong Kong, do not vote,” also on the estate’s podium.

Police were called, and they seized 16 pieces of paper with seditious phrases. Wong’s fingerprints were found on two of them.

Wong’s case was adjourned to June 9 for sentencing to await his background report, a social welfare report and a psychological report.

Sedition is punishable by up to seven years in jail. If the defendant is found to have colluded with an “external force” when committing the offence, they face a maximum of 10 years behind bars.

Jail terms handed down at the magistrate’s court, however, are capped at two years, or three when a defendant is convicted of more than one offence.

The maximum penalty for sedition was increased in March 2024, when lawmakers passed Article 23. Before that, it was punishable by up to two years, when sedition fell under a colonial-era ordinance.

“This prosecution is, in fact, a trial of the law itself,” Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Chow Hang-tung told a court last month.

Chow, 41, made the remark during a defiant closing argument in her trial.

The barrister-turned-activist sought to challenge the legitimacy of the national security allegations against herself, former colleague Lee Cheuk-yan, and the organisation they led, which held Hong Kong’s candlelight vigils commemorating China’s 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square.

From 1990 to 2019, the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China organised the commemorative event every year on June 4 at Victoria Park, demanding accountability for the bloody crackdown and the democratisation of China, both taboos in the country.

Beijing imposed a national security law in Hong Kong in 2020, following the 2019 protests and unrest. In 2021, police arrested the Alliance’s leadership, including Chow, Lee, and Albert Ho. The Alliance voted to disband that year, ending its decades-long vigils and advocacy.

Chow, Lee, and the Alliance are standing trial for “inciting subversion” under the national security law, an offence that carries a maximum penalty of 10 years behind bars. Ho pleaded guilty when the trial opened in January.

HKFP looked at the events surrounding the establishment of the Alliance, the Tiananmen vigils it organised, and the ongoing trial of its leaders.

Hong Kong prosecutors have argued that the case against the Alliance is not political and does not concern its activism, the vigils, or the 1989 crackdown. They allege that, however, the group had been calling for the overthrow of China’s ruling Communist Party (CCP) through its “end one-party rule” slogan – a key tenet of the Alliance since its founding.

For Chow, who represents herself in the trial, the prosecution has upended Hong Kong’s value of being a free-wheeling city that tolerates the kind of political dissent not permitted in mainland China.

The trial has in effect “cornered” the court, forcing it to choose its side between the rule of law and an authoritarian regime, she argued.

Alliance and 1989 Tiananmen crackdown

Massive pro-democracy demonstrations broke out in China in the spring of 1989, triggered by the death of Hu Yaobang, a former CCP leader seen as a reformist. Students and protesters gathered in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square for weeks, demanding political reforms and democracy, as the rest of the country rallied to support those in the capital city.

In May that year, the Alliance was founded in Hong Kong, and huge demonstrations were staged in support of protesters in mainland China.

Around 1.5 million people joined a mass rally on May 28, a day after celebrities like Anita Mui, Teresa Teng, Eric Tsang, and Jackie Chan took part in the Alliance’s benefit concert in support of the students’ movement.

Lee personally went to Beijing to deliver donations raised during the concert. However, he was detained and made to sign a letter of remorse, around the time the tanks rolled in to crush the burgeoning movement. 

The protests in Beijing ended in a bloody crackdown as Chinese troops dispersed protesters on June 3 and 4. Estimates of death tolls during the crackdown range from hundreds to thousands.

In the years that followed, the Alliance organised candlelight vigils at Victoria Park every June 4 to commemorate the dead and to keep the spirit of the 1989 pro-democracy movement alive.

The Alliance’s five tenets – release pro-democracy activists, vindicate the 1989 democracy movement, hold those responsible for the crackdown accountable, end one-party rule, and build a democratic China – were an integral part of the candlelight vigils.

Tens of thousands of people attended the commemorations every year. They lit candles, sang songs, observed a moment of silence, and chanted the Alliance’s five slogans, led by the group’s leaders.

In 2020, authorities banned the vigil for the first time, citing Covid-19 restrictions. They prohibited the gathering again the following year, also citing the pandemic. The Alliance was disbanded in September 2021, following the arrests of its leaders.

No official vigils have been held since 2019, but there is a heavy police presence at Victoria Park and nearby streets on June 4.

For four consecutive years, Victoria Park has been occupied by a pro-China food festival in early June, including the anniversary day of the bloody crackdown.

‘Weird’ prosecution

In her closing argument last month, Chow said the prosecution was “weird,” as the defendants had not disputed the alleged acts and instead, they embraced what they did.

“Ending one-party rule means putting an end to the status quo, in which those in power are not bound by the law,” she told the court in Cantonese. “What is really in dispute is what the law suppresses and what it protects.”

According to the prosecution, the Alliance’s calls to “end one-party rule” had exceeded the legitimate boundary of freedom of expression as the defendants intended to stoke hatred against Beijing. “Freedom is not absolute,” lead prosecutor Ned Lai told the court in Cantonese.

Chow said the prosecution’s argument had undermined the values long championed in Hong Kong, such as freedom of expression and the rule of law.

“Speaking out the truth has become stoking hatred. Seeking justice has become taking advantage of suffering,” she said. “Asking for accountability has become breaching the constitution. Demanding democracy has become inciting subversion.”

She maintained that the court must protect human rights when reaching a verdict in the case.

“What the court has been asked to ban, to punish in this case are, in fact, what society and the law should encourage… They are the core values of Hong Kong, the norms and ideals accumulated through generations,” she said.

“I hope the court will make a correct decision to safeguard the dignity and bottom line of the law, at a time when values are being reshaped,” she added.

Prosecutors have argued that there are no “lawful means” to end CCP rule after a 2018 constitutional amendment stipulated that the party’s leadership is the “defining feature” of China’s socialist system.

During his closing submission last month, Lee’s lawyer, Erik Shum, argued that prosecutors had presented a “tautological theory.”

“We ask: How exactly did the Alliance incite others to overthrow the CCP? And my submission is that the prosecution has always reverted to the claim that ending CCP rule is illegal,” Shum said in Cantonese.

Shum urged the court to draw a boundary for what is considered an acceptable political expression and what is not.

“The court must not pay lip service to human rights protections,” he said.

The three-judge panel – Alex Lee, Johnny Chang, and Anna Lai – has adjourned the proceedings, saying they hope to deliver a verdict in “mid or late July.”

In a letter from prison this week, Chow, who has been behind bars since September 2021, said she would go on a 37-hour hunger strike in commemoration of the 37th anniversary of the 1989 crackdown.