Appearing before a designated three-judge panel at the West Kowloon Law Courts on Tuesday, Lee explained that the Alliance advocated an end to one-party rule, as such a form of governance stood in opposition to democracy.
He also said that basic civil rights, including freedom of speech, assembly, and the press, must be granted in order for civil society to organise and thrive. Only then would society at large be able to consider democratisation, he added.
“The freedom that arises [from ending one-party rule] allows people to participate in society through their own independent groups and political organisations. If you can’t even speak up, how can you talk about democracy? One-party rule… is a very, very big obstacle to democracy,” Lee said.
“Once you have a civil society, be it the intellectuals, the students, workers, women, businesspeople, or farmers, they will be able to discuss what political system works best for China. There must be a foundation for discussion before they can enter the political system,” he added.
Judge Alex Lee then asked the activist whether he meant to say that the CCP should not be in power.
The defendant replied that he was opposed to one-party rule, not the CCP’s leadership. He believed the CCP could lead the nation if the people saw it fit, he added.
One problem with Hong Kong’s old-style pan-democrats is that they saw democracy as an ideal and an end in itself rather than a means to better governance. The CCP, meanwhile, is on a different wavelength. It does not want a civil society that ‘organizes and thrives’. Note what happened to volunteers collecting food and promoting a petition after the Tai Po fire, or to a bookshop hosting Spanish lessons. The whole point of a Leninist one-party system is to ensure there are no ‘independent groups and political organisations’ in which people can participate.
It seems absurd that these are matters before a court, and people face prison terms as a result.