The district court has released the judgement for nine key occupy figures. All of them are found guilty of charges related to public nuisance over the 2014 pro-democracy campaign. However, the promise of universal suffrage under Basic Law is still in vain. Even the judgement depicts a gloomy picture of political development nowadays, I hope Hong Kong citizen could listen what they have said in the court.





Although the judge Johnny Chan emphasized that civil disobedience does not constitute a defense against any criminal charges, with statement that he “do not see how the offence of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance could have the undesirable effect of curtailing or suppressing civil disobedience.” The motivation of engaging in civil disobedience, so as to occupy movement itself is debatable. By definition, civil disobedience is a person attempt to break the law in order to reveal its unjust and willingly accepts the penalty consequently. Non-Permanent Judge of the Court of Final Appeal Honourable Leonard Hoffman stated in the R v Jones (Margaret) [2007] 1 AC 136 case that, “civil disobedience on conscientious grounds has a long and honourable history in this country. People who break the law to affirm their belief in the injustice of a law or government action are sometime vindicated by history. It is the mark of a civilised community that it can accommodate protests and demonstrations of this kind.”





If civil disobedience is ought to be an act to be recognized, how do we evaluate umbrella movement and the intention of every participants, whatever the leaders and every participated citizens?





Benny Tai, one of the convicted co-founders of the Occupy movement, had argued that,“If faith is all about pursuing justice, as long as there is injustice in society, our faith will be to carry on the struggle.” Hong Kong has been struggled for universal suffrage for more than 30 years. Although it is the promise written in Basic Law, it has not been the truth even until nowadays. Worse still, after the 8.31 Decision of the National People’s Congress, Chinese government has twisted their promise. No one expect that a pseudo-democracy would be the final destination for Hong Kong.





That is why even moderate scholars like Benny and sociologist Chan Kin-man chose to launch occupying movement. They, or many participated citizens are not for their self-interest, they are altruistic and selfless. The most touching speech is from another figure, Eason Chung. He stated








“Today, the people who are being sued are actually all participants of occupying movement participated from different ways or friends who did not participated, they are all citizens who treated Hong Kong importantly….what you have to know is every citizens who spent his or her time, effort, the past and future, and even devoted his or her life for the movement.” “Whatever you are judge, lawyer, teacher, reverend, journalist, correctional service staff, councilor, student, assistant, supporter and opponent, every occupations, before mentioning all these identities, we are only people.”





In Reverend Chu Yiu-ming's mitigation, he said“I am just a bell toller. I ring the bell.” I hope we Hong Kong people would not give up, even if nine key occupy figures were thrown behind bars. Last month, the government tabled a proposal to allow the transfer of fugitives to any jurisdiction. Many challenges are still coming to our city. We have no grounds for give up especially when facing many people who have devoted themselves a lot.





According to the proposed changes, should the Chinese government confirm that the individual has offended any of the terms stated in the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, after getting permission from the Chief Executive and the Hong Kong Court, the individual may be extradited to Mainland China to await trial without deliberation in the Legislative Council.





The Hong Kong government’s proposition to change a current law is an attempt to prepare to entrap oppositional voices for China, and is a step towards judicial integration and eroding Hong Kong’s legal system, allowing Hong Kong citizens to be subjected to an autocratic Court. China’s threat to Hong Kong also places people from Taiwan and other parts of the world who pass by Hong Kong in jeopardy. The situation merits attention from the international community.






The current Chinese judicial system is controlled by the Party and its ideology, Chinese citizens do not enjoy fair and open trials. Individuals, such as the Party’s political opponents and activists, have disappeared”, falsely accused, lawyers have been arrested and even tortured. Its behaviour has been been condemned by the international community. Hong Kong should not hand over suspects to places that do not meet the standards of international human rights law, let alone to a legal system that is completely different from our own.





Not only would Hong Kong people not be protected by the common law system, but people from all over the world would be exposed to the risk of retaliatory detention in China. Since the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer of Huawei, in Canada, China has retaliated and arrested three Canadian citizens in China. The Chinese government’s move has casted a shadow over the revision of the law. Hong Kong would deteriorate into an international hostage exchange ground, aiding dictatorial China in countering international pressure is something that Hong Kong people cannot tolerate.






However, the first to bear the brunt will be the dissidents of China’s powers in Hong Kong and Taiwan. The Chinese government has long been notorious for the accumulation of "economic crimes" against domestic activists. Under the new law, anyone may become the next Lam Wing Kee, the next Gui Minhai, and the next Lee Mingche - the next victim of the “totalitarian justice”.





As we can see, commercial sectors are worried about the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance very much. For many years, commercial sectors did not concern about human and political rights in our city. They even accused that democratic movement like occupying central is a destruction of economy. There is no difference when facing authoritarian hegemony this time. I hope it is the time for them to consider why many Hong Kong citizens have sacrificed for our city with countless price and think about what they can do now.