Lee Cheuk-yan’s turn

In the HK Alliance subversion trial, Lee Cheuk-yan…

…argued on Tuesday that calling for an end to “one-party dictatorship” in mainland China did not mean ousting the Communist Party from its leading role under the state’s constitutional framework.

“The Communist Party can hold power, but the people should be able to choose their government,” he said on the first day of his oral testimony at West Kowloon Court.

Lee also suggested that one-party rule contradicted the constitution’s preamble, which provides for “multiparty cooperation and political consultation” under the party’s leadership.

“It is our wish that by ending one-party dictatorship, people can fully exercise their rights under the constitution,” he added.

…Lee dismissed prosecutors’ contention that the alliance used “so-called democracy” as an excuse to vilify the party.

…Lee Cheuk-yan said police had never openly stated that the alliance was a threat to the country’s safety before the present case, or cited national security grounds in banning its annual vigils.

Ultimately, this all comes down to expression of an opinion. But National Security courts have government-picked judges, no jury, and a near 100% conviction rate.