Hong Kong Court Affirms Guilt of 47 Democracy Advocates in Major National Security Trial

Hong Kong, February 23, 2026 — A Hong Kong court upheld the convictions of 47 pro-democracy activists in a landmark case under the city’s national security law, marking the culmination of a protracted legal battle that has drawn global scrutiny. The decision, announced on Monday, affirmed the charges of conspiracy to commit subversion against the activists, who were initially arrested in 2021 for organizing an unofficial primary election to select pro-democracy candidates for the Legislative Council (LegCo). The ruling has intensified debates over the scope of the 2020 national security law and its impact on Hong Kong’s political landscape.

Background: The ‘Hong Kong 47’ Case

The case, dubbed the ‘Hong Kong 47,’ originated from an unofficial primary election held in 2020, which aimed to coordinate pro-democracy candidates for the LegCo elections. Prosecutors argued that the activists sought to undermine Hong Kong’s political system by securing a legislative majority to veto budget bills and force the resignation of the city’s chief executive. The 47 defendants, including former lawmakers, activists, and academics, were charged under Article 29 of the National Security Law (NSL), which criminalizes conspiracy to commit subversion.

The trial, which began in 2023, saw 45 of the 47 defendants convicted in November 2024. Sentences ranged from four to 10 years, with critics accusing the government of using the NSL to suppress dissent following the 2019 anti-extradition protests. Eleven activists who appealed their convictions lost their bids, including former lawmakers Leung Kwok-hung, Lam Cheuk-ting, Raymond Chan, and Helena Wong. These 11 appeals included 10 activists and another individual, as specified in the Sky News source. All appeals over sentences were also dismissed by the Court of Appeal.

Legal Arguments in the Appeals

The appeals centered on several legal claims, including allegations of fair trial violations, misinterpretation of the NSL’s provisions, and the feasibility of the alleged subversion scheme. The prosecution maintained that the activists’ plan to use the LegCo to paralyze the government constituted an unlawful means under the NSL. Judge Jeremy Poon, presiding over the case, described the scheme as a ‘constitutional mass destruction weapon,’ emphasizing its threat to Hong Kong’s political stability.

Defense lawyers argued that the NSL’s broad definition of ‘subversion’ allowed the government to criminalize peaceful political activity. They also contended that the prosecution failed to prove a concrete plan to subvert state power, citing the absence of evidence for a coordinated scheme. However, the Court of Appeal rejected these arguments, asserting that the activists’ actions posed a clear risk to Hong Kong’s constitutional order.

International Reactions and Implications

The ruling has sparked renewed criticism of the NSL, which was enacted in 2020 to address the 2019 protests. Critics, including Amnesty International, argue that the law has been used to silence dissent and erode Hong Kong’s autonomy. The Australian government’s foreign minister, Penny Wong, expressed concern over the conviction of Australian citizen Gordon Ng, whose appeal was dismissed. Meanwhile, Beijing and Hong Kong authorities insist the NSL was necessary to restore stability and prevent ‘foreign interference.’

Current Status of the Defendants

As of February 2026, 18 of the 45 convicted activists have been released from prison, including former district councillors Jimmy Sham and Lester Shum. Others, such as Joshua Wong and Benny Tai, remain incarcerated. The court’s decision has left many activists and their supporters questioning the fairness of the legal process, with some describing the outcome as a ‘missed opportunity to correct mass injustice.’

Broader Impact on Hong Kong’s Democracy Movement

The ‘Hong Kong 47′ case represents a pivotal moment in the city’s political history. The mass prosecution of pro-democracy figures has significantly weakened the movement, which once drew millions in 2019. While the government maintains that the NSL is essential for maintaining order, critics warn that its application has stifled political pluralism and undermined Hong Kong’s unique status under the ‘one country, two systems’ framework. The case continues to symbolize the tensions between Hong Kong’s autonomy and Beijing’s influence, with implications for the region’s future governance.