Former Macau lawmaker Au Kam San sentenced to 12.5 years for subversion

On the 6th, the Macao Judiciary sentenced former pro-democracy Legislative Assembly member Au Kam-san to 12 and a half years in prison on charges including "subversion of state power." Au participated in anti-government demonstrations in 2019 and was arrested in 2020 for "inciting secession," later being accused of using his political influence to challenge state sovereignty. The court ruled that his actions constituted a threat to national security and delivered the verdict based on the Law on Safeguarding National Security. The case has sparked widespread concern in Macao society due to its implications for the judicial handling of political dissent.

Since its return to China in 1999, Macao has retained the autonomous system of "one country, two systems," but its political space remains relatively limited in practice. While the Legislative Assembly features multi-party participation, the major parties are predominantly pro-government factions, with pro-democracy figures holding only a minority of seats. Following the 2019 anti-extradition bill movement in Hong Kong, the central government tightened security oversight in the special administrative region, enacting the National Security Law in Hong Kong in 2021 and passing similar legislation in Macao in 2023, which criminalizes "subversion, secession, and terrorist activities." Au's case was tried against this backdrop, reflecting the central government's continuing decline in tolerance for political dissent in the special administrative region.

During the trial, the court cited relevant provisions from Chapter 2 on "National Security Crimes" of the Law on Safeguarding National Security. Combining Au's social media posts with his participation in protest actions, the court concluded that he had engaged in "subversion of state power." The judge pointed out that although Au had expressed dissatisfaction with the government, his actions exceeded the bounds of freedom of speech and posed a genuine threat to state sovereignty and social order. The verdict also stated that repeat offenses would carry even longer prison sentences. The ruling has caused divisions within Macao's political circles, with some arguing that judicial independence has been eroded, while others support the safeguarding of national security.

The U.S. government strongly condemned the verdict, criticizing Beijing for using national security powers to suppress peaceful dissenting voices. In a statement, the U.S. Department of State pointed out that as part of China, Macao's judicial system should adhere to international human rights standards. U.S. diplomats further stated that if Macao continues to stifle political pluralism in the name of national security, it will have long-term negative impacts on cross-strait relations and international trust. This statement prompted a response from Chinese authorities, who accused the United States of interfering in internal affairs and called for respect for China's sovereignty.

The verdict in Au Kam-san's case not only delivers a direct blow to Macao's pro-democracy movement but also serves as a warning regarding freedom of speech and political participation throughout society. Many social movement groups have begun calling for stronger rule of law and human rights protections, expressing concern that future similar cases will further weaken political pluralism. From an international perspective, the case has intensified criticism of China's implementation of national security laws in the special administrative region and may affect Macao's image on the international stage, particularly in areas of cooperation with Western countries. If Macao continues to tighten surveillance in the name of national security in the future, it could provoke broader international attention and pressure.