It’s noteworthy that many Hongkongers charged with national security crimes, including pro-democracy protesters, are pleading guilty. On occasion, such news is met with derision. Some do not realize that it is yet another sign of the sinicization of Hong Kong’s legal system—particularly Beijing’s implementation of the national security law in the city.
In China, there really is no decision to be made. You confess—always. It’s just how the legal system works in the communist country, and to not confess would be foolish in almost any circumstance. Chinese government data for 2021, the year with the most recent complete data, show there are 511 not-guilty verdicts out of 1.7 million verdicts. The numbers are shocking.
Anyone who has ever been arrested is well aware of this. Even though you’re innocent, you will be found guilty. You know it; everyone knows it—which is why everyone confesses. Chinese courts rarely trouble themselves with witnesses and technical or forensic evidence; it’s simply unnecessary and costly, especially when they already have a confession.
And this goes for human rights defenders, too. They can languish in prison for years, experiencing severe torture that nearly destroys them. Yet once released and recuperated, they all return to the same work. They know it can kill them or, at the very least, destroy their lives. Yet they return, almost without fail. Yet even these people will, with some very rare exceptions, confess. Is it because they are weak or without principles? Of course not.
Anyone who believes they are fighting for a good cause knows that such a fight is only possible when one has freedom. And everyone knows if you confess, your sentence will be significantly reduced. If you know with certainty that you will be convicted, why choose to spend eight years in prison instead of four?
And in those cases where such a logical argument does not work, the police have almost unlimited abilities to force you into a confession instead, from psychological to physical torture, threats against family members, or even detention or arrest of loved ones. If those methods don’t work, the police could go further by going after other personal contacts, such as colleagues, business partners, etc., whom they can use as pawns to get a confession.
The fact that so many in Hong Kong—people tied to the anti-extradition and pro-democracy protests—are pleading guilty is a sign of a complete loss of faith in the ability to get a fair trial, and recent verdicts show clearly why.
The draconian national security law has swung the pendulum further toward the police, prosecutor, and the state, where, for example, the ability for defendants to receive bail pending trial is much reduced while pre-trial detentions are being prolonged. Some, like Gordon Ng, have spent more than one and a half years in pre-trial detention and denied bail. Others, such as Albert Ho, the former leader of the Democratic Party, received bail due to deteriorating health, but with strict limitations, including being unable to meet with foreign officials.
Politicians in Hong Kong have since repeatedly spoken about introducing further local legislation, where tighter restrictions from the national security law, such as bail conditions, will also apply. Such local legislation is also intended to “fill gaps” left by the Beijing-imposed law, which means the legal framework limiting dissent is likely to worsen as even more acts and speech will become criminalized.
When more people are moved forward to trial, including some of the protest leaders, don’t be surprised to see them plead guilty. Their pleading guilty is an indictment of Hong Kong’s fallen legal system and their new masters in Beijing, not of themselves.
