The Deafening of Hong Kong’s Democracy

Since 2006, the leftist, pro-grassroots activists that make up the League of Social Democrats (LSD) have fought to preserve democracy in Hong Kong. As the Chinese government has dramatically increased pressures to quash pro-democratic activism in the territory, it has become more difficult than ever for the group—known for their street protests—to stay afloat. 

On June 29th of 2025, the party finally announced their disbandment, disheartening the few public advocates left in Hong Kong. Chan Po-Ying, the party’s leader, voiced her frustrations to reporters of the, “impossibility of operating amid the omnipresence of red lines and the draconian suppression of dissent.” They are the third major opposition party to disband this year. Up until the LSD’s announcement, they were the last functioning pro-democracy party in Hong Kong. 

The conflict between pro-democratic activists and mainland China is nothing new, as they’ve been at odds over what rights the city should maintain since Hong Kong was returned to China by the British in 1997. Initially, as a “special administrative region,” Hong Kong was promised the right to free speech, freedom of assembly and the fair rule of law. But, as Beijing increased its global influence, it also increased its repression of native Hong Kong citizens. These actions kickstarted a “decade of protest” beginning in September 2014. Tens of thousands of protestors participated in street demonstrations and sit-ins, demanding democratic elections and setting the stage for even larger protests in 2019, when Beijing passed a law to extradite local Hong Kong citizens to mainland China for trial. 

In direct response to these protests, Chinese lawmakers overwhelmingly passed a 2020 law known as the National Security Law (NSL), which marked the start of an unprecedented crackdown on civil liberties in the region. The NSL made it illegal to take a “vaguely defined set of actions” like subversion, treason and collusion with foreign forces, with a maximum sentence of life in prison. While China claimed this law was necessary to stop protests that threatened the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), critics warned it effectively made it illegal to say or do anything the CCP didn’t like. Not only would Beijing have ultimate authority over the interpretation of the law—not Hong Kong itself—but trials could be held behind closed doors, and news agencies and NGOS could be placed under strengthened restrictions. By June of this year, over 330 people in the city of 7 million had been arrested under the dubious law. A group of 45 prominent democratic figures, like media tycoon Jimmy Lai, have already been convicted of “subversion”: merely organizing an unofficial council election primary. 

Opposition parties were banned in 2021 and forced to disband, with the city’s oldest and biggest opposition group—the Democratic Party—announcing its dissolution in February 2025. Independent media outlets have been silenced too. The Press Freedom Index, which measures how free journalists are to report independently across the world, has dropped sharply in Hong Kong, even when compared to the decreasing freedom of the general public.

A second set of laws—Article 23—was passed in 2024 by the city legislature, giving the government new powers to crack down on various forms of dissent. Now, suspected activists may be barred from meeting with their lawyers, and Hong Kong residents and businesses may not even criticize the regime while they are abroad—a key move in China’s crackdown on overseas activists. 

The League of Social Democrats has only become the latest casualty of Beijing’s civil liberties campaign. They were the only pro-democracy party following the passage of the NSL to continue small-scale street protests and carve out a space for public expression.  Known for their more confrontational tactics compared to the more moderate Democratic Party, the LSD was less popular than the Democrats, but a powerful force for democracy and social equity nonetheless. 

The dissolution of the LSD has been seen as the death blow to the formal pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong. Dozens of activists have been jailed and bankrupted for their views. News outlets have been shuttered for speaking the truth. Opposition figures have been completely shut out of the city’s legislature. Even the judicial branch has seen the scope of its power severely curtailed by the CCP. Now, no formal organization exists in the city to stand up against encroaching authoritarianism. In its last public statement, the LSD urged Hong Kong residents to “uphold their values in their own ways,” implicitly emphasizing the endurance of democratic ideals, as long as the people do not let it be forgotten. 

Extemp Analysis by: Lindsey Zhao

Q: What are the biggest barriers to democratic activists in Hong Kong?

A: Everything and everyone! (Seriously…)

There are a lot of difficulties to being an activist in Hong Kong. What to pick? Honestly, when there are so many options I often just list a couple and pick what I think are the most important to mention. With these kinds of questions, it’s really easy to fall into the trap of having too much to talk about with really general taglines, and then confusing your judge with the 50 different examples you’re mentioning in one point. 

Here are a couple mentioned in the article

• closed door trials, no contact with lawyers

• crackdowns on overseas activists

• no free press

• no opposition parties

From past experience with these speeches, one of the most important things opposition activists need the ability to do is spread their message and establish credibility—that’s the first step to getting people to support you, and it’s pretty clear Hong Kong activists will need to start from step one, given the new restrictions and the unwelcoming atmosphere.

Therefore, my answer would be something like:

A: an inability to spread democratic messages

with a rough expectation verification substructure 

1. lack of opposition parties

   1. obviously if there’s no opposition parties in the city legislature, they can’t prevent authoritarian laws from being passed, nor can they stage protests to spread a message

   2. cite the law that banned opposition parties (more accurately, the law that only allows “patriots” to run for office and bans any convicted activists from running) and show how that hinders their ability to spread democratic messaging

2. lack of independent media outlets

   1. emphasize the ease with which information can be used to manipulate a population 

   2. then show how bad the media crackdown has gotten in Hong Kong and how people are unable to learn about new protests, laws, messages, etc

3. crackdowns on overseas activism

   1. say something about how when activists are exiled from their home country, they often continue to speak up from their new country

   2. Article 23 encourages a crackdown on overseas activism too, making it harder for exiled figures to maintain a presence at home, which cuts off leadership for democratic organizations

Read More Here: 

• The Economist

• Tessa Wong, Grace Tsoi, Vicky Wong & Joy Chang, BBC

• Rishab Rathi, The Diplomat

• Yuchen Li & Yoshi Pak, DW

• Tiffany May, New York Times

• Paul Eckert, Radio Free Asia

• Al Jazeera